Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHINA.

PRESENT SITUATION.

Captain FAIRFAX: 1.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can make a statement as to the present situation in China in general and of British residents in particular, as regards their personal safety, security of property, and commercial interests?

The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Austen Chamberlain): The advance of the Southern forces into Central China does not appear to have adversely affected the personal security of British residents, nor does it appear to have involved any serious danger to British property, although there has inevitably been some risk to and disturbance of British establishments lying directly in the army zone. The anti-British agitation in Szechuan has led to the destruction of some British property at Chungking, and it has been considered advisable for women and children to leave that port. The position of British commercial interests in South China was dealt with in the reply given on the 10th instant to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Newcastle North. As regards mid-China, conditions are still uncertain, and it would be premature to pass judgment.

Captain FAIRFAX: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman can make any statement about the seizure of the British ship "Sunning" at Swatow by pirates?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I really think I ought to have notice of a question of
that kind. It does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that, in case of need, there is a sufficient naval force at Hankow to ensure the safety of British residents?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I would much prefer that questions as to conditions of such delicacy and difficulty were put on the Paper; if hon. Members will kindly do so.

TARIFF COMMISSION.

Mr. RILEY: 3.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when the last meeting of the Chinese Tariff Commission was held; and whether it is intended to issue a Report?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The last formal meeting of the Tariff Conference was held on 9th April; since then it has been in suspense. It would therefore be premature to consider the question of any official publication of its transactions at the present stage.

BOXER INDEMNITY COMMISSION.

Mr. RILEY: 4.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when the Report of the Boxer Indemnity Commission will be available?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The Report is in the printer's hands and will be presented as soon as possible.

EXTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.

Mr. RILEY: 5.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the present practice of extra-territorial jurisdiction in China has yet been received; and, if so, when it will be published?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The Report has not yet been received, but should arrive in the course of the next day or two. The question of publication will then be considered.

WANHSIEN INCIDENT.

Captain FOXCROFT: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of serious charges made by Chinese against the action by His
Majesty's Ships "Cockchafer" and "Widgeon," and the armed British steamer "Kiawo," on 5th September, at the port of Wanhsien, he will publish a Report on the subject?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given by me on 10th November to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Platting.

Captain FOXCROFT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware these malicious libels are being repeated in this country, and can he take any steps to prevent their repetition here?

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not think that would come under the jurisdiction of the Foreign Minister.

Oral Answers to Questions — LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

INTERNATIONAL OPIUM CONVENTION.

Mr. CAMPBELL: 6.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs which of the signatory States to the International Opium Convention of February, 1925, have ratified that convention; when it is anticipated it will come into force; and whether the International Opium Convention signed at The Hague in 1912 continues in operation?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: A ratification of the International Opium Convention has been deposited on behalf of His Majesty covering all the parts of the British Empire other than Canada and the Irish Free State. Of the other signatories, so far as His Majesty's Government are aware, only the Sudan and Portugal have deposited ratifications. The Convention will not come into force until the requisite number of ratifications prescribed in Article 36 have been deposited. In September last, the Assembly of the League of Nations adopted, at the instance of the British representative, a resolution urging the Governments of all States members of the League to ratify or accede to the Convention, so that the necessary ratifications might be deposited before the end of the present year, and His Majesty's Government earnestly hope that the remaining signatories will ratify with all possible despatch. The Hague Convention of 1912 continues in operation as between the States parties to it.

DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE.

Mr. PONSONBY: 7.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether further papers will be published on the work of the Preparatory Commission of the League of Nations for disarmament; and whether the calling of a Conference on disarmament is now contemplated?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Since the first report of the Preparatory Commission was published, neither the Commission nor any of the sub-committees have issued a report, though a lengthy report by the Military sub-Committee has been agreed upon. As soon as reports are issued I will consider the hon. Member's suggestion. At the last Assembly a resolution was passed asking the Council to convene the Disarmament Conference before the next Assembly unless material difficulties rendered this impossible. In coming to a decision as to the date of the Conference the Council will doubtless take into account the progress made by the Preparatory Commission.

Commander BELLAIRS: With reference to the long delay of the Conference on disarmament, is not the proposal of the League of Nations delaying the possibility of a Washington Conference which might result in some reduction of armaments?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not think the delays have been unreasonable or other than might have been expected. As far as I know, those who take the keenest interest in this subject feel that time must be given for any satisfactory result to be obtained, and that no advantage will be derived by hurrying the matter unduly.

MANDATES COMMISSION (QUESTIONNAIRE).

Mr. TREVELYAN: 10.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the public interest which has been aroused in the matter and in view of its general importance, he will communicate to the House before its despatch the text of the reply which His Majesty's Government propose to make to the Council of the League of Nations on the subject of the so-called questionnaire prepared by the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The reply of His Majesty's Government to the League was despatched on 8th November. I have given directions for the presentation of our reply (together with whatever is required to make clear to what we are replying) as a Command Paper to both Houses.

Oral Answers to Questions — EGYPT.

Mr. PONSONBY: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any report to make to the House with regard to the policy of His Majesty's Government in Egypt arising from the conversations with the Egyptian Foreign Minister during his recent visit to this country?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir; no decisions were taken or sought, but I took the opportunity to assure His Excellency of the sincere desire of His Majesty's Government to co-operate with the Egyptian Government and received his assurance that the Egyptian Government shared to the full this friendly wish.

Mr. PONSONBY: May I ask whether, in view of the fact that Lord Lloyd gave a long statement to the Imperial Conference on the policy of His Majesty's Government in Egypt, this House may be furnished with more than the rather bald statement we have had to-day?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member's question does not arise out of his question on the Paper, which is, as to the communications which have passed between myself and the Egyptian Foreign Minister in London. The supplementary question is as to what statement Lord Lloyd made to the Imperial Conference. Statements made on foreign affairs to the Conference are in their nature private and confidential, and by the desire of the Conference will be kept confidential, but I am always at the service of the House if it wants a statement.

Oral Answers to Questions — GERMANY (FORTIFICATIONS, KONIGSBERG AND KUSTRIN).

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: 12.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether, seeing that the German Government have constructed fortified works at Konigsberg and
Kustrin, which violate Article 180 of the Treaty of Versailles, any remonstrance has been made to Germany on the subject; and whether it is proposed to call for the dismantling of these works?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The matter is at present under the consideration of the ex-Allied Governments and I am not yet in a position to make any statement on this question.

Sir F. HALL: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if it is not the fact that these works have been constructed in such a manner as not to be detected by anyone except those with a knowledge of German military secrets, and will he consider bringing the matter before the Allied Conference at Versailles?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not think my hon. and gallant Friend heard either part of my answer to his question. I will repeat it—the matter is at present under the consideration of the ex-Allied Governments, and I am not yet in a position to make any statement on this question.

Oral Answers to Questions — GREAT BRITAIN AND URUGUAY (ARBITRATION TREATY).

Mr. SHEPHERD: 13.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the general obligatory Arbitration Treaty between Great Britain and Uruguay, ratified in February, 1919, is not included in the collection of analogous treaties recently published by the League of Nations; whether this is due to the Treaty not having been deposited with the League; and whether, if so, having regard to the importance of the principle embodied in this Treaty, he will arrange for its being so deposited?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The Treaty referred to by the hon. Member was, like most of the Arbitration Treaties entered into by this country from 1903 onwards, concluded prior to the existence of the League of Nations, and such treaties of earlier date do not come within the purview of Article 18 of the Covenant of the League. All Arbitration Treaties since concluded by this country, and all renewals of such treaties, have been duly registered under that Article. There is, of course, no objection to communicating
this Treaty to the League should the League desire at any time to be furnished with it.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL NAVY.

ARMOUR-PLATE (EXISTING PLANTS).

Mr. THURTLE: 14.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the nature of the inducements he is offering to the manufacturers of armour plate to maintain their existing plants and technical staffs, in view of the fact that, at present, owing to the operations of the Washington Convention, four out of the five existing plants are not required?

The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Bridgeman): The inducement offered to the manufacturers of armour plate to maintain their existing plants and technical staffs is that each manufacturer has been given a share of the orders for armour plate at prices which take into account the higher cost necessarily involved in producing small quantities.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it equally necessary, in order to give this encouragement to private firms, to maintain the plant and machinery at His Majesty's Dockyards?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: That does not refer to armour plate.

DOCKYARD APPRENTICES.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 15 and 16.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether, in view of the recent discharges of apprentices just out of their time at His Majesty's Dockyard, Devonport, the Admiralty propose to advertise the dockyard entrance examination for next April and offer 50 or 60 appointments for apprentices; and whether the Admiralty will reconsider the advisability of taking this course under the present circumstances;
(2) whether he is aware of the anxiety felt by the schoolmasters in Devonport at the hopelessness in the outlook of their most intelligent pupils who have hitherto been encouraged in their studies by the prospect of a career in His Majesty's service in the dockyard; and whether he will consider the position of
the young men in Devonport who in normal circumstances would be going into the dockyard, and draw up a plan covering some years ahead so that there may be more certainty of employment for apprentices at the end of their training?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: The numbers of apprentices to be entered in His Majesty's Dockyards next year have not yet been fixed. In determining the numbers for each dockyard, the Admiralty will take into account, as far as possible, the anticipated state of employment in the respective dockyards during and immediately after the apprenticeship of the new entrants; but it is not possible to determine, with assurance, the numbers of employés required in five years' time. No undertaking can be given committing the present or a future Board of Admiralty to the retention of workmen who have served their appenticeship in the dockyards if and when it is necessary to make discharges.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the great disappointment of these young men, who are encouraged to take a special course and give proof of the highest ability, if the moment they are taken out of the dockyard they are discharged without any prospect of employment?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: It is one of the unfortunate consequences of economy, but I do think that these apprentices are able to learn work which is, I hope, very useful to them in dockyards outside.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Could the right hon. Gentleman not make plans for some time ahead, so that schoolmasters might know what the prospects are?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: I have already said that it is impossible to make plans for five years ahead.

Sir A. SHIRLEY BENN: May I ask whether the First Lord can see his way to retain some of the ex-apprentices who are being discharged and lower the number of new entrants?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: I will consider what the hon. Member has said. I do not quite realise what the effect of his proposal would be, but I will take it into consideration.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will take steps to increase our scale of armaments in order to satisfy the desires of the Liberal party?

LOSS OF HIS MAJESTY'S SHIP "VALERIAN" (PENSIONS).

Major Sir BERTRAM FALLE: 18.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether the widows and dependants of the Royal Naval ratings who were lost with His Majesty's ship "Valerian" will receive the scales of pensions for dependants laid down on page 164 of the Appendix to the Navy List, April, 1926, in addition to the widows' pension provided under the National Health Insurance Act, observing that the naval pension is a condition of service and that all naval ratings contribute to the widows' pension through National Health Insurance?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: The claims of the widows and dependants of the ratings who were lost in His Majesty's ship "Valerian" will be dealt with under the conditions and scales of pension laid down in Order-in-Council of 7th November, 1924, particulars of which appear on page 164 of the Appendix to the Navy List, April, 1926. Their position under the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act, 1925, to which my hon. and gallant Friend presumably refers in the concluding portion of his question, will be governed by Section 24 of that Act, and in this connection I would refer him to the reply which was given to him on the 18th November, 1925 [OFFICIAL REPORT, col. 357], in connection with the loss of His Majesty's submarine "M. I."

Sir B. FALLE: Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very great difference that exists between the sailor who contributes to National Health Insurance, and loses his life for King and country, and the man who pays for National Health Insurance and unfortunately loses his life in civil life, in which case his widow receives up to £600 in cash?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: I am not aware of the difference, but I will look into it.

ROYAL FLEET AUXILIARIES (OVERTIME PAY).

Sir B. FALLE: 19.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty
whether the crews of Royal Fleet Auxiliaries employed overtime in scraping and painting confined spaces are held to be entitled to the extra pay for work in confined spaces in addition to overtime rates, observing that recently payment was refused in the case of the crew of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary "Limol"?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Davidson): Extra pay for work in confined spaces of R.F.A. "Limol" is always paid for, but overtime rates are not paid in addition, as time off in lieu is given.

DOCKYARDS (FIRST-AID).

Sir B. FALLE: 20.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether first-aid dressing boxes are supplied for use in all departments and shops in His Majesty's Dockyard, Portsmouth; if so, whether a workman or workmen qualified in first-aid are available for service with these boxes; and, if not, whether, in view of the large number of men employed in the dockyard and the incidence of minor injuries, he will take steps to provide first-aid dressing boxes and qualified men?

Mr. DAVIDSON: First-aid dressing boxes are kept available for use in all the principal workshops and departments of the Dockyard; and arrangements are made to ensure that as far as possible the services of any workmen qualified in first-aid work shall be utilised when occasion arises for recourse to the dressing boxes. As my hon. Friend was informed in answer to his question of 10th July, 1924, the present arrangements for dealing with accidents in the Dockyard are considered to be adequate.

KING'S HARBOUR MASTER, ORKNEY.

Mr. LIVINGSTONE (for Sir ROBERT HAMILTON): 17.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the duties and the emoluments of the King's Harbour Master in Orkney?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: In addition to such ordinary duties as appertain by Statute and Order in Council to a King's Harbour Master of a Dockyard Port, this officer is retained in the interests of the Admiralty while the salvage operations on ex-German men-of-war are in progress. He also acts as agent for the Imperial War Craves Commission in all questions
concerning Lyness Cemetery. His appointment terminates in May next and the question of the appointment of a successor or combining this post with that of another Admiralty officer will be considered.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

EXTENDED BENEFIT, MIDDLESBROUGH.

Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON: 21.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of applications for extended benefit in the Middlesbrough area during the last six months; the number granted and refused; and similar figures for the corresponding period a year ago?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Betterton): During the six months ended 11th October, 1926, the number of applications for extended benefit considered by the Middlesbrough Local Employment Committee was 35,930, of which 33,564 were recommended for allowance and 2,366 for disallowance. The figures for the corresponding period of 1925 were 28,109, 26,091 and 2,018, respectively.

Mr. THOMSON: 22.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of cases in the Middlesbrough area in which he was unable to accept the decision of the rota committee as regards applications for extended benefit during the past six months?

Mr. BETTERTON: During the six months ended 11th October, 1926, the number of cases in which the recommendations of the Middlesbrough Local Employment Committee in regard to applications for extended benefit were not accepted was 97 out of nearly 36,000 dealt with.

Mr. THOMSON: What are the reasons for suggesting that the Minister of Labour knows better than the local committee the merits of each case?

Mr. BETTERTON: The hon. Member knows that under the Act the ultimate decision is placed on the Minister. That discretion is placed upon him by Parliament, and that discretion he is bound to exercise. But, as I have told the hon. Member, the number of cases where he
has disagreed with the local committee is less than one-third of 1 per cent.

RELIEF SCHEMES.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: 23.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he will furnish information regarding schemes undertaken or projected for the provision of work for the unemployed in 1926–27, including schemes arranged by Government Departments, schemes under the auspices of the Unemployment Grants Committee etc.?

Mr. BETTERTON: On 25th September, 1926, the date of the last available return, work was proceeding on 588 schemes approved by the Unemployment Grants Committee, and on 41 other schemes approved by the Committee work had not commenced. The corresponding figures for the Ministry of Transport were: schemes in operation, 435; schemes approved but not commenced, 57. Since the 25th September, 15 further schemes have been approved, and 23 are still under consideration.

Mr. RICHARDSON: Is there likely to be any further extension owing to the position the country is in?

Mr. BETTERTON: That is a wholly different question, and I must ask for notice of it.

POPLAR AND STEPNEY.

Mr. SCURR: 27.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of persons who applied for extended benefit at the Poplar and Stepney Exchanges, respectively, for the last six months; and the number which were refused?

Mr. BETTERTON: During the six months ended 11th October, 1926, the number of applications for extended benefit considered by the Poplar Local Employment Committee was 5,193, of which 3,290 were recommended for allowance and 1,903 for disallowance. Corresponding figures for Stepney for the same period are: 5,743 cases considered, 2,802 recommended for allowance and 2,941 for disallowance.

BENEFIT (IMPROPER CLAIMS).

Sir F. HALL: 28.
asked the Minister of Labour whether, having regard to the evidence disclosed in the Report of the Ministry for 1925 as to a widespread
abuse of the Unemployment Fund, it is proposed to take steps to make it more difficult for undeserving persons to receive benefits from the fund; and whether, as the evidence shows that the payment is used to a large extent to provide funds for betting, drinking, and entertainment instead of for food, clothing, and house rent, he will consider whether it would be possible to arrange for some part of the benefit in suitable cases to take the form of food and clothes vouchers instead of money?

Mr. BATEY: On a point of Order. May I ask whether this question is in Order? It is full of innuendoes and it is a brutal libel on better men than the man who is asking the question.

Mr. SPEAKER: I must confess that I have not myself read the Report on which the hon. and gallant Member bases his question. I take it that he is not going beyond what is stated in the Report? He ought not to do so.

Mr. BETTERTON: I must dissent entirely from the suggestion that there is widespread abuse of the Unemployment Fund. I am satisfied that the steps taken to safeguard the Fund against improper claims are in general effective. Payment of benefit by means of vouchers would require legislation. It is one of the points on which it is open to Lord Blanesburgh's Committee now sitting to make a recommendation. At present I do not think I ought to say more than that proposals of this kind have been examined departmentally from time to time and have been found to present a good many difficulties and to be open to the possibility of serious abuse.

Mr. THURTLE: On a point of Order. Has not the reply of the Minister borne out the point of Order of my hon. Friend, that this question is an abuse of the Rules governing questions?

Mr. SPEAKER: The reply has shown me that if my attention had been a little more close I would have struck out the word "widespread" in the question.

Sir F. HALL: Is it not a fact that the reply bears out the point raised in the question, although perhaps I should not have used the word "widespread"?

Mr. RICHARDSON: Was not the word "widespread" deliberately put into the question?

Mr. BETTERTON: The page of the Report to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers is page 72, which shows that the number of persons prosecuted last year was 2,034 out of a total of something like 3,000,000 claims, or less than .07 per cent.

Mr. SPEAKER: A great deal of my time is occupied in taking adjectives out of hon. Members' questions. This one escaped me. It shows the value of our rule that hon. Members must not introduce their own adjectives on the Paper at Question Time.

Oral Answers to Questions — DRIFT NET MENDING (TRADE BOARD).

Mr. KELLY: 26.
asked the Minister of Labour what are the rates agreed upon for those employed in the industry covered by the Drift Net Mending Trade Board; whether such rates are being paid; and, if not, what steps the Minister is taking to enforce payment of the rates and conditions?

Mr. BETTERTON: For workers other than home workers the Drift Net Mending Trade Board have fixed a minimum time rate of 6d. an hour, and for home-workers a minimum piece rate of 5s. 6d. per net. The application of these rates to workpeople employed by boat-owners is contested, and it has been indicated to the Department that, pending legal decision, the rates will not be paid, and are in fact not being paid. A test prosecution is accordingly being taken, and it is expected that it will be heard at an early date.

Mr. KELLY: Can we have an idea as to what is meant by "an early date"?

Mr. BETTERTON: It means exactly what it says. We are bringing a prosecution in the local Courts within the next few weeks.

Mr. KELLY: In view of the many months delay on this question, can the Minister give any assurance that we are likely to have this scheme before the end of the year?

Mr. BETTERTON: I have certainly every hope that it will be heard long before that. It may be that the matter will be carried further by one side or the other, in which case, no doubt, the magistrate will be asked to state a case.

Oral Answers to Questions — POOR PERSONS (LEGAL AID).

Mr. W. BAKER: 30.
asked the Attorney-General whether he is aware that an increasing number of poor persons are being deprived of the resort to the Courts because of the heavy costs which must be incurred; and whether he will consider the advisability of granting larger powers to County Court Judges by increasing the maximum figure which may be the subject of action in such Courts?

The SOLICITOR - GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip).: My right hon. and learned Friend has no reason to suppose that there is any foundation for the suggestion made in the first part of the hon. Member's question. The facilities given to poor person litigants in the Supreme Court have been greatly increased during recent years. My right hon. and learned Friend is not prepared to propose any extension of the pecuniary limits of the jurisdiction of the County Court.

Oral Answers to Questions — LAW COURTS (ARREARS OF WORK).

Mr. W. BAKER: 31.
asked the Attorney-General whether he is aware that prior to the Long Vacation the work at the Law Courts was much in arrears; and whether he will consider the advisability of creating three new Judges for the trial of cases outside London?

The SOLICITOR - GENERAL: My right hon. and learned Friend is not aware that before the Long Vacation the work at the Law Courts was in arrear. The number of cases set down for hearing in the King's Bench Division at the commencement of the present Sittings was less than the corresponding number at any Michaelmas during the previous seven years. There were, on the other hand, slight increases in the number of cases set down for trial on that date in the Chancery Division and in Probate and Divorce, but my hon. and learned Friend has no reason to suppose there is
any arrear in either of these. The aggregate of cases set down in all divisions is less than in any of the last seven years except 1923, when it was practically the same. My right hon. and learned Friend does not think the facts justify the adoption of the suggestion contained in the second part of the question.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

CLOCK TOWER LICHT (DIVISIONS).

Colonel DAY: 32.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, if he will, for the benefit and convenience of Members of this House, consider the advisability of causing a green or red light to be visible from the Clock Tower, in order to give warning of Divisions?

Captain HACKING (for The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS): There does not appear to be any widespread desire among Members of either House that additional warning of Divisions should be given. My right hon. Friend therefore regrets that he is unable to accept the hon. Member's suggestion.

Colonel DAY: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that several Members have missed Divisions which they would have been able to catch had some warning been given?

Captain HACKING: Is the suggestion that had a red light been shown there would have been a better attendance?

PANELS (HOUSE OF LORDS).

Colonel DAY: 33.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, if he will state the names and nationality of the artists and their assistants commissioned to make designs for the ten panels representing the various British Colonies in connection with the new decoration of the Upper House?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Captain Hacking): This is entirely a matter for the House of Lords Offices Committee, and my right hon. Friend regrets that he has no information on the subject.

Colonel DAY: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that an American named Dean Cornwall has been appointed as first assistant to the artist; and does he not think we have enough British artists to do the work?

Captain HACKING: There is no charge upon public funds in connection with the work, and this House has no authority in the matter.

Oral Answers to Questions — POOR LAW.

CASUAL WARDS.

Major OWEN: 37.
asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the number of wards, mentioned in the Survey of Casual Wards, which took place in 1923, where either the cleanliness was not good or no night clothes provided, and consequently the clothing was not taken from the casuals according to law and dried and disinfected if necessary (Casual Poor (Relief) Order, 1925, Regulation 7); and whether he will at once call for another survey like the last, and enforce the law where it provides for cleanliness and decent accommodation for the destitute wayfarers?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): The condition of the casual wards has received my right hon. Friend's constant attention, and substantial improvements have already been obtained. His inspectors continue to press upon the guardians the need of remedying such defects as those referred to in the question. He does not, however, think that there would at the present time be advantage in another such special survey of the wards, which are, of course, regularly inspected as part of the ordinary duties of the inspectors.

CONSOLIDATING BILL.

Major OWEN: 38.
asked the Minister of Health whether, in his new Bill for consolidation of the Poor Law, he will preserve the legal right of the necessitous poor to relief given by 43 Elizabeth, c. 2, and all the responsibilities of the guardians if they fail to give it; the legal responsibilities of the relieving officers if they fail to give it in cases of sudden or
urgent necessity; and of the overseers if they fail to give it in those cases where by law they are bound to give it?

Sir K. WOOD: It is not within the scope of a consolidating Bill to make any amendments of substance in the law which it consolidates. All existing rights and responsibilities will, therefore, remain intact.

Mr. SCURR: 41.
asked the Minister of Health whether he proposes to introduce the Poor Law Reform Bill this Session?

Sir K. WOOD: No, Sir.

Mr. SCURR: Does the hon. Gentleman not think it would be convenient for the authorities to have the actual proposals of the Ministry before them?

Sir K. WOOD: That might be a desirable course to take.

GUARDIANS DISQUALIFICATION, BRISTOL.

Mr. W. BAKER: 40.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the seat of a member of the Bristol Board of Guardians has been declared vacant because she received treatment following a motor accident in the vicinity of that institution; that it was impossible to remove the patient owing to the serious nature of the injuries, and that the cost of maintenance as a private patient was repaid, in addition to the specialist's fees; and whether he is in a position to give an assurance that this special type of disqualification shall be dealt with in the Measure of Poor Law reform which he proposes to introduce during 1927?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend is aware of this case which presents a striking illustration of the anomalies prevailing under the existing law. He is not in a position to say when amending legislation will be introduced, but this matter should certainly receive attention whenever such legislation is considered.

Mr. BAKER: In view of the Minister's statement, will he not give the House an assurance that this matter will be put right at the earliest possible moment?

Sir K. WOOD: I think I have already indicated our anxiety to deal with this matter when a suitable opportunity occurs, which I hope will be soon.

Colonel WOODCOCK: As this was an accident and as the treatment was purely emergency treatment and has since been paid for, is it not possible to see that despite this inadvertency she shall retain her seat?

Sir K. WOOD: I am afraid not under the existing law.

Oral Answers to Questions — TOTTENHAM AND WOOD GREEN JOINT DRAINAGE COMMITTEE.

Colonel WOODCOCK: 39.
asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to the resolution of the Tottenham and Wood Green Joint Drainage Committee compelling all its employés to be members of their respective trade unions; and if he proposes to take any steps to counteract pressure of this description?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend has not received any official representations on this matter, and he is communicating with the committee.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Is it possible in a case where the majority of a council protest against such a resolution being carried out, to get an injunction in the High Court to prevent it being carried out?

Sir K. WOOD: That is a legal point.

Sir F. HALL: If, after communication with the committee to which the hon. Gentleman has referred, he finds the facts are as stated in the question, will steps be taken to see that those men who do not belong to the unions are not precluded from work?

Sir K. WOOD: We must ascertain the facts in the first place.

Major MALONE: Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that the Tottenham Council rescinded that objectionable resolution last week?

Oral Answers to Questions — POSTAL SERVICES (CHRISTMAS).

Colonel WOODCOCK: 42.
asked the Postmaster-General if he has settled what are to be the arrangements regarding postal services during the Christmas period; and whether it will be possible to have a delivery on Sunday rather than on Boxing Day?

The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Sir William Mitchell-Thomson): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, I think a delivery on Boxing Day, which will include a large proportion of the Sunday postings, will serve a more useful purpose than one on Sunday.

Oral Answers to Questions — ERIBOLL ESTATE, SCOTLAND (SALE).

Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR: 44.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what precedents exist for selling a Sutherland sheep stock at a Martinmas valuation; and on what grounds it was decided to sell the Eriboll sheep stock at Martinmas without advertisement or public notice?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): I am not in possession of comprehensive information as to the precedents that may exist for selling a Sutherland sheep stock at a Martinmas valuation, but I am aware that a Whitsunday valuation is usually adopted in such transactions. Eriboll estate had been offered for sale by public auction on three occasions on the basis of a Whitsunday valuation of the sheep stock and no bids had been received; and, therefore, when an offerer was forthcoming who was prepared to pay the upset price at which the property was last put up at auction I decided that his offer should be accepted, although it was conditional on a Martinmas valuation for the sheep.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: Is it not the fact that there is not one precedent for this valuation and that it may make a difference to the public of from a quarter to one-third of the whole value of the sheep stack?

Mr. RILEY: Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question as to the grounds on which this decision is arrived at?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The grounds were that the estate was not going to be useful for the original purpose for which it was bought and it was sold in the public interests.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: 46.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will publish the precise terms of the
agreement under which the estate of Eriboll was sold, the minute of reference to the arbiter at the sheep stock valuation, and copies of any papers containing instructions or information conveyed to the arbiter by the Board of Agriculture or by the Board and the purchaser jointly?

Sir J. GILMOUR: As I indicated in a reply which I gave to a supplementary question yesterday, I shall be prepared to give to any hon. Member the result of the arbiter's award when it has been made.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: Will the right hon. Gentleman lay the Minute of the reference to the arbiter so that we can see exactly what are the terms on which this sheep stock has been valued?

Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir; I think that is quite unnecessary.

Oral Answers to Questions — WASHINGTON HOURS CONVENTION.

Major OWEN: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that unanimous agreement has been reached between the participating countries, the Government will proceed immediately to ratify the Washington Hours Convention?

Mr. BETTERTON: I have been asked to answer this question. The present position in this matter was explained in the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Rotherhithe (Mr. B. Smith) on the 11th November. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of this answer.

Oral Answers to Questions — EMERGENCY POWERS REGULATIONS (PROHIBITED MEETINGS).

Colonel DAY: 48.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department the total number of meetings banned by chief officers of the police under the powers vested in them by the Emergency Powers Act in England, Wales and Scotland respectively to the last convenient date?

Captain HACKING: During the period 1st May to 19th October my right hon. Friend issued authorities for the prohibition of meetings or processions on 21
occasions in England and one in Wales. On the 19th October he gave a general authority to Chief Constables, and under that authority 40 meetings have been prohibited in England and 23 in Wales up to and including Sunday, the 14th instant. Any question as to action under Regulation 22 in Scotland should be addressed to the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Colonel DAY: Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether application has to be made to the Home Secretary for the banning of these meetings by Chief Constables?

Captain HACKING: No. As I said in my answer, the Home Secretary has authorised Chief Constables in the country that they can issue a ban without any special authority from him.

Mr. BECKETT: Have all the meetings that have been banned been meetings held by one side in the dispute, or have meetings by the Economic League and other meetings of that kind calculated to produce disorder also been banned?

Captain HACKING: I must have notice of that question.

Oral Answers to Questions — PETROLEUM ACT, 1926.

Mr. HAYDN JONES: 49.
asked the Home Secretary what appointments, if any, are to be made under the Petroleum Act, 1926?

Captain HACKING: My right hon. Friend is not making any appointments under this Act, and it is not anticipated that any will be required.

Oral Answers to Questions — PATRINGTON FARM SETTLEMENT.

Sir FREDRIC WISE: 47.
asked the Minister of Agriculture the total estimated loss on the Patrington Farm Settlement?

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Guinness): The accumulated loss shown in the accounts of the Patrington Farm Settlement to 31st March, 1926, is £71,006 on the farm profit and loss account, and £29,451 on the estate account. The combined accumulated loss on both accounts is £100,457. This loss is arrived at after taking into account hypothetical interest charges on Exche-
quer advances to farm and estate accounts, headquarters administrative expenses, and provision for depreciation of buildings and farm implements. A large part of the loss mentioned is due to interest charges over a period of eight years.

Mr. FENBY: Has the Minister any information as to how much the ex-service men settled on the Patrington Farm Settlement have lost?

Mr. GUINNESS: We have not got any specific information about that. These ex-service men hoped to share in the profits on a co-partnership basis, but unfortunately there were no profits to share. We have undertaken that we will give them every possible consideration in paying expenses for removal in any cases where they can get occupation elsewhere.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: Does this not show the danger of embarking on any schemes of land nationalisation?

Oral Answers to Questions — WEST INDIES (PASSENGER TRANSPORT).

Colonel WOODCOCK: 50.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can inform the House what steps he has taken to assist the West Indies with regard to the situation that has arisen of the threatened reduction of passenger transport facilities between these islands and Canada, and also the limited passenger service between the islands and this country?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for COLONIAL AFFAIRS (Mr. Ormsby-Gore): The provision of transport facilities between the West Indies and Canada is regulated by agreement between the Colonies and the Govern-

1925.
English Schools.
Vernacular Schools.


Malay.
Tamil.
Chinese.


Average number of pupils enrolled
13,876
29,227
8,153
15,409


Number of pupils exempt from school fees.
3,427
All free.
—
—


I regret that I have no information as to the number of free places in the Tamil and Chinese Vernacular Schools.

ment of Canada. My right hon. Friend regrets that he cannot hold out any hope of the possibility of further subsidies in aid of passenger communications between the islands and this country.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that passenger facilities between Jamaica and the Mother Country are now smaller than they have ever been, and will he endeavour to assist one of the oldest Colonies to keep in touch with the Mother Country?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: That is clearly a question that should be addressed to the Treasury rather than to myself. Obviously, the question of giving a subsidy for further passenger accommodation is not one within the mere discretion of the Colonial Office.

Commander BELLAIRS: Is it not the case that the question of an air service is being considered in the West Indies, which would help the passenger service?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: That is true.

Oral Answers to Questions — FEDERATED MALAY STATES (EDUCATION).

Mr. SCURR: 52.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the number of children in the Federated Malay States who are receiving education in the English schools, and how many are receiving free education; and the number in the vernacular schools and the number receiving free education?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: As the information desired by the hon. Member is of a statistical nature, I am causing the particulars to be printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The particulars desired are given, in the following table:

Oral Answers to Questions — AFRICAN COLONIES AND PALESTINE (IMPORTS AND EXPORTS).

Sir F. WISE: 51.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the imports and exports from 1st January, 1926, to date of Uganda, Kenya, Nyasaland, Tanganyika, Northern Rhodesia, and Palestine; and what percentage of the imports into these countries is British?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: The returns in the case of these territories are available up to varying dates, though the information asked for in the second part of the question is only partially forthcoming. With my hon. Friend's permission, I will circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following are the figures:

Tanganyika Territory.—January to July, 1926.

Imports: £1,830,908, of which 40 per cent. represents imports from Great Britain.

Domestic Exports: £1,455,731.

Kenya and Uganda.—January to July, 1926.

Imports: £4,241,352, of which 41 per cent. represents imports from Great Britain.

Domestic Exports: £4,423,935.

Nyasaland.—January to August, 1926.

Imports (excluding specie): £462,558. Of the percentage representing British goods or imports from Great Britain no statement is at present available.

Exports (excluding specie): £543,330.

Northern Rhodesia.— January to April, 1926.

Imports (excluding specie and Government imports): £450,045. Of the percentage representing British goods or imports from Great Britain no statement is at present available.

Exports (excluding specie): £72,262.

Palestine.£January to June, 1926.

Imports: £E3,267,661, of which 10.3 per cent. represents imports from Great Britain.

Exports: £E669,021.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Motion made, and Question put,
That the Proceedings on Government Business be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[The Prime Minister.]

The House divided: Ayes, 196; Noes, 81.

Division No. 460.]
AYES.
[3.25 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
England, Colonel A.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Campbell, E. T.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)


Albery, Irving James
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Atholl, Duchess of
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J.A. (Birm., W.)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Chapman, Sir S.
Fermoy, Lord


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Christie, J. A.
Fielden, E. B.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Clayton, G. C.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Frece, Sir Walter de


Bennett, A. J.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Bethel, A.
Colfax, Major Wm. Phillips
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony


Betterton, Henry B.
Cooper, A. Duff
Gates, Percy


Boothby, R. J. G.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Glyn, Major R. G. C


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Goff, Sir Park


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Grace, John


Braithwaite, A. N.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Graham, Frederick F. (Cumb'ld., N.)


Brass, Captain W.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Grant, Sir J. A.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William clive
Dalkeith, Earl of
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Briggs, J. Harold
Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Briscoe, Richard George
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Grotrian, H. Brent


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Burman, J. B.
Drewe, C.
Hall, Lieut.-Col Sir F (Dulwich)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Harrison, G. J. C.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Hartington, Marquess of
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Smithers, Waldron


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Malone, Major P. B.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Haslam, Henry C.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Hawke, John Anthony
Margesson, Captain D.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootie)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Herbert, S. (York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Murchison, C. K.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Nuttall, Ellis
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Hurd, Percy A.
Oakley, T.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Perring, Sir William George
Waddington, R.


Jacob, A. E.
Pielou, D. P.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Warrender, Sir Victor


Jephcott, A. R.
Radford, E. A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Raine, W.
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Ramsden, E.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Watts, Dr. T.


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Remnant, Sir James
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Rice, Sir Frederick
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Ropner, Major L.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Lougher, L.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Wise, Sir Fredric


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


MacIntyre, Ian
Savery, S. S.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


McLean, Major A.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Skelton, A. N.



McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Colonel Gibbs and Major Hennessy.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hayes, John Henry
Ritson, J.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hirst, G. H.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Rose, Frank H.


Baker, Walter
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Scrymgeour, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Scurr, John


Batey, Joseph
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sexton, James


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Bondfieid, Margaret
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Bromfield, William
Kennedy, T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Buchanan, G.
Lansbury, George
Stamford, T. W.


Charleton, H. C
Lawrence, Susan
Taylor, R. A.


Cluse, W S.
Lee, F.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Cove, W. G.
Lunn, William
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dalton, Hugh
March, S.
Thurtle, Ernest


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Maxton, James
Townend, A. E.


Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)
Montague, Frederick
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Morris, R. H.
Viant, S. P.


Dennison, R.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Fenby, T. D.
Oliver, George Harold
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Owen, Major G.
Westwood, J.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Palin, John Henry
Whiteley, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Paling, W.
Wiggins, William Martin


Grundy, T. W.
Ponsonby, Arthur
Windsor, Walter


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Potts, John S.



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Riley, Ben
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. T. Henderson.

INDUSTRIAL ASSURANCE (JUVENILE SOCIETIES) BILL [Lords].

Reported, without Amendment, from Standing Committee B.

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed.

Bill, not amended (in the Standing Committee), to be taken into consideration upon Monday next.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

STANDING COMMITTEE B.

Mr. WILLIAM NICHOLSON reported from the Committee of Selection; That they
had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee B; Brigadier-General Sir George Cockerill, Sir Thomas Davies, and Captain Eden; and had appointed in substitution: Admiral Beamish, Captain Brass, and Mr. Hilton.

Report to lie upon the Table.

Orders of the Day — HOUSING (RURAL WORKERS) [MONEY].

Considered in Committee under Standing Order No. 71A.

[Mr. JAMES Hoer; in the Chair.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to promote the provision of housing accommodation for agricultural workers and for persons whose economic condition is substantially the same as that of such workers and the improvement of such accommodation, by authorising the giving of financial assistance towards the reconstruction and improvement of houses and other buildings, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament of any expenses incurred by the Minister of Health under the said Act, including any contributions made by him towards any expenses incurred by a local authority in making grants under the said Act in respect of dwellings, subject always to the following conditions:

(a) the application for assistance must have been received by the local authority before the first day of October, nineteen hundred and thirty-one;
(b) in calculating the amount of a contribution no account shall be taken of such part, if any, of the grant in respect of the dwelling as exceeds either two-thirds of the estimated cost of the works in respect of which the grant was made, or the sum of one hundred pounds:

Provided that where a grant is made by the provision of periodical sums the amount of the grant shall be taken to be an amount equal to the capital value of the sums to be so provided, calculated as on the date of the completion of the works;
(c) any such contributions shall be made by way of annual payments for a period of twenty years from the completion of the works in respect of which the grant was made and shall be an amount equal to one-half of the estimated average annual payments falling to he made by the local authority in respect of the charges on account of loans raised by the authority for the purposes of grants, or which would have fallen to be so made if the sums expended by the local authority on account of the grant has been raised by means of loans."—[King's Recommendation signified.]

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Neville Chamberlain): It is my duty this afternoon to ask the Committee to give its sanction to the payment out of the
Exchequer of certain contributions in aid of the provision and improvement of housing accommodation for agricultural workers and for persons who are substantially in the same position. The Committee will remember that in the Bill—the Second Reading of which was passed by this House on 3rd August last—provision is made for assistance for this purpose, either by way of loan or by way of grant, but as Exchequer contributions are only contemplated in a case where assistance is given by way of grant, I propose, in the very few observations with which, I think, it is necessary to trouble the Committee, to confine myself to that side of the proposal.
It will be seen, by reference to the Resolution, that the giving of contributions by the local authority, aided by grants from the Exchequer, is accompanied by certain conditions, and to those conditions I will call the attention of the Committee. First of all, there is the limiting condition with regard to time. It is proposed that the operation of the provision enabling these grants to be made, shall last only for a limited period of time—namely, five years, and application for assistance under the Bill must, therefore, be in the hands of the local authority before the 1st October, 1931. I think the reason for that limitation is fairly obvious, because the number of houses and other buildings which can be affected by these proposals is strictly limited, and it is very desirable, in the opinion of the Government, that if they are to be improved, they should be improved at the earliest possible moment. We have, therefore, provided a limit for the time during which the special terms shall he available, and we think we have given all reasonable opportunities for people to take advantage of them.
The second limiting condition is a limitation of amount. It is provided under the Resolution that the contributions of the local authority and the Exchequer put together shall not exceed two-thirds of the total cost of the alterations which are to be carried out, and, moreover, that they shall be subject to a maximum sum of £100. It is also provided that the Exchequer grant is to be half of the total contribution made by the local authorities, and it thus follows that the expense of the proposed alterations
will be borne in three equal shares by the owner, by the local authority and by the Exchequer. Each of them will contribute one-third of the cost, and the maximum amount which will be demanded of the Exchequer in the case of any single house will be £50. There is also in the Resolution a condition as to the method in which the contribution is to be made. It takes the form, which is familiar in housing legislation, of an annuity for 20 years. The contribution in that form will be made in respect of the loan charges contracted by the local authority which borrows money for the purpose of making these contributions.
The conditions which are embodied in the Resolution do not include all the conditions which are found in the Bill. In Clause 2 of the Bill there are other conditions limiting the amount of the improved value of the dwelling, and also specifying that a certain minimum sum must be expended to enable contributions to be made. I have deliberately left those particular conditions out of the Resolution, for the reason that none of them, it seemed to me, was vital to the principle of the Bill, but more a matter for discussion in Committee; and it would hardly have been fair to the Committee to tie their hands in discussions on those points by drawing the Resolution in such a rigid form as to exclude any such discussion. I do not think it is necessary for me to say any more about the Resolution itself, nor do I think it necessary to go over all ground which I covered when describing the Bill on Second Reading, but there are just a few points on which I might add a word in connection with the Bill. These concern, first of all, the nature of the work which we contemplate will be done; secondly, the persons to whom the contribution will be made; and, thirdly, the character of the local authority which we propose shall be the responsible body.

The CHAIRMAN: With regard to the last point, I can hardly see how that can arise on this Resolution; otherwise we should have a repetition of the Second Reading Debate.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I had thought that as the Exchequer contribution had to be paid to a local authority and administered by them, that possibly the nature of that authority would be
relevant to the Resolution; but if that is not, so I do not wish to press that point.

The CHAIRMAN: If the right hon. Gentleman suggests that the successful operation of this Resolution depends on the character of the local authority and their powers of repayment, I could not object to his observations on that point, but, obviously, it would open the way for a much wider Debate than I thought was contemplated.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: In that case I think I will omit all reference to the authority, and leave that to be discussed, as no doubt it will be fully discussed, in Committee. As to the nature of the work, that will be found described in the Second Clause of the Bill, where certain particular kinds of alterations are specified. I notice that there is on the Paper an Amendment to leave out the words
and other buildings.
I am at a loss to understand why objection should be taken to those words.

The CHAIRMAN: Those words are merely a repetition of the words in the long Title of the Bill, and their inclusion or rejection will make no practical difference, and therefore I do not propose to accept that Amendment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I will have one more try, and say that the only other point to which I had proposed to make any allusion was the person to whom the contribution was to be paid. I am not at all sure whether I shall be in order in doing so, after what has fallen from the Chair, and I think I will confine myself to this observation, that in putting conditions into the Bill we have endeavoured to secure that the Exchequer contribution shall inure to the benefit of agricultural workers and of other persons in substantially the same condition as they are, and that it shall not be diverted to the personal profit of the landlord, or to other tenants who are not of the character described in the Resolution.

Mr. MacKENZIE LIVINGSTONE: Will this Measure apply to crofters' houses in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: There is no reason why it should not.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will elucidate further—

The CHAIRMAN: A habit has grown up of putting questions immediately after a Ministerial statement, and sometimes developing those questions into speeches. I would remind hon. Members that on the present occasion we are in Committee, and that the Minister and others can speak more than once. If the hon. Member will defer his observations, I will keep an eye on the quarter of the House in which he sits.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I feel somewhat nervous in rising as a result of the attitude of mind towards the discussion that the Chairman revealed when pulling up the right hon. Gentleman who introduced the Resolution; because I do not know that I can hope to succeed, where he has failed, in keeping within the very narrow limits which have been laid down for the discussion. We on this side object to the Resolution as we objected to the Bill of which the Resolution is the soul. There is one interesting thing about the Resolution to which, Mr. Chairman, I hope you will allow me to refer. It reveals to the Committee more clearly than anything which has yet been said or introduced the real mind of the Government with regard to working-class housing. We are invited to-day to increase expenditure on the patching of old houses. Later in the Session, according to information submitted by the Prime Minister, we are to be called on to reduce the public expenditure on the provision of new houses. That is a reversion of the traditional Tory policy. Anything which the party opposite has done in the way of contributing to a solution of the housing problem during recent years is something into which they have been forced and for which they deserve no credit. The traditional policy is that while houses are legally healthy and commercially profitable, they ought to be privately owned. It is only when they become unhealthy and unprofitable that the State is expected to come in as a relieving officer to the owners. The party opposite are traditionally hostile to Socialism in new houses, but they are traditionally favourable to Socialism in regard to slums. They have a happy knack of
serving this policy in phraseology calculated to appeal to the highest human sentiments. When we are dealing with the city it is described as a slum clearance. Pictures are drawn of the conditions in which the people in the slums dwell, and a slum dweller is painted almost as a person who brought his slum with him into the world. In fact, it is considered part of his original sin, and a Conservative statesman poses as his redeemer. If people on this side of the House for any reason raise an objection to the expenditure of public money on a policy such as this, then they are painted as defenders of the slums and oppressors of the poor.

Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKE: On a point of Order. I would like to ask if the right hon. Gentleman is in order in going so very far from the subject?

The CHAIRMAN: I think the right hon. Gentleman is only stating certain premises. I am awaiting the conclusions; but I cannot wait indefinitely.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I wish to express my gratitude to you, Mr. Chairman, for your patience, and I will not trespass upon your ruling, or on the feeling—I hope the shameful feeling—of the hon. Member opposite, or upon your impartiality in the Chair. In this Resolution the policy is referred to as the improvement of houses. Of course, this is a very respectable garment, but I think we are entitled to examine what is underneath. According to the Resolution, financial assistance is to be given for the reconstruction and improvement of houses and other buildings for agricultural labourers, and persons whose economic conditions are similar to those of such labourers. I want to draw the attention of the Committee, first of all, to the fact that this financial assistance is asked for a particular section of the population. This is what Conservative speakers are accustomed to call class legislation. The stockbroker and the company promoters are not to share in the beautiful buildings which are to accrue from the expenditure of this public money. On the other hand, their ill-gotten gains are to be levied for the benefit of the agricultural labourers, and persons who may hope one day to be as poor as the agricultural labourers are now.
I think Conservative speakers are accustomed to call this legislation for the favoured few and to regard the policy as in some way a violation of one or other of the Ten Commandments. I think this is important, and I submit it because I am afraid of trespassing on your ruling. I wish to draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that the money we are asked to vote here is not to be spent solely on the repair of dwelling-houses, but it is to be spent partly on the reconstruction or alteration of new buildings. I think that is a very important part of the Resolution, and one which the Committee is entitled to have made clear.

The CHAIRMAN: The operative words are in respect of dwellings.

HON. MEMBERS: And other buildings.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I may have misread the Resolution. I submit this point for your ruling because it is very important at this stage, and at this point we should have a ruling. If the sum asked for here is voted by the Committee to-day, will it be within the power of the Minister, or the party to whom he delegates his authority, to spend a part of that money on the alteration or reconstruction of any building that is not now a dwelling-house?

The CHAIRMAN: The words are limited to dwellings.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: May I call your attention to line 6 of the Resolution, which says, "and other buildings"?

The CHAIRMAN: I have already pointed out that those words are quite inoperative, and have only been put in to identify this particular Bill.

Mr. TAYLOR: In the first Clause of the Bill as printed the word "buildings" is used, and it says "houses or buildings" and not other buildings. As we have had no explanation from the Minister on this point in his Second Reading speech, perhaps you, Mr. Chairman, could now give us a ruling as to what that means?

The CHAIRMAN: The money must be spent only on dwellings. I think that is quite clear.

4.0 P.M.

Mr. WHEATLEY: It is not my usual custom to come to the assistance of the Government, but I hope I am not mis-
interpreting their view when I say their intention was to use the financial resources of this Bill for the purpose of reconstructing or altering other buildings that are not in the nature of dwelling-houses for the purpose of being used in the future as dwelling-houses. If your ruling is to stand and it is to be quite clear that through the passing of this Measure the House is not putting any power into the hands of the Government or of its delegates to reconstruct such buildings and convert them into dwelling-houses, then, I think, a considerable portion of our opposition to the Bill falls to the ground.

The CHAIRMAN: The contribution must be for a dwelling, but, whether a dwelling may include an out-house or not, it cannot be a contribution to general agricultural improvement. I do not say that it cannot be used for conversion into a dwelling of something which is not now a dwelling.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I think that to some extent clears the air. At any rate, it confirms my view of the Bill, and it harmonises with the acquiescence expressed by the Minister of Health in the view when I submitted it to him. The money that we are asked to vote here, as you have ruled, may be used for the purpose of so altering a building that heretofore has not been used as a dwelling-house that in future it may be used as a dwelling, and the Committee is entitled to consider the class of building to which this provision may be applied. You, Sir, have referred to out-houses. I do not know what is the legal distinction between an out-house and a stable, but I have no doubt that a shrewd lawyer would include a stable within the description of an out-house. At any rate, it is well known that part of this money, in pursuance of this policy, may be used for the conversion of stables into dwelling-houses.
Scattered all over the country, and particularly in the country districts, we have a large number of stables that are no longer required for their primary purpose by the owners. No real gentleman now drives out in his carriage and pair; indeed, no real gentleman would house his favourite motor car in one of these obsolete stables. Yet it is a pity, in the view
of these English gentlemen, that this property should be allowed to decay. There is a shortage of housing accommodation in the country. A gentleman may feel that for one purpose or another he requires another labourer. There is no housing accommodation available for that additional labourer, and, even if there be, the wages which the gentleman is prepared to pay to the additional labourer would not, if it were all spent in rent, meet the present economic rent of a healthy, desirable house. So, what should me more natural than that there should emanate from the political party of that gentleman a proposal to put the labourer where he would not put his car? We have now reached the stage where "Stables for the workers" is a plank in the Conservative programme.
After all, if you consider the history of that party, this is not a long step in degeneracy from where they have already arrived. [Interruption.] The right hon. Gentleman says—sotto voce, I suppose, is the term—that this is a speech for the platform. This is not a Resolution for the platform, unless it be for the platform in which we are to see the temporary seclusion of the Conservative party. As I was about to say before being interrupted from a quarter from which we do not expect interruption, this is not a long step in the degeneracy of the Conservative party with regard to the housing of the working classes. We have all been accustomed to the policy of large dilapidated houses, once occupied by the rich, being made do for the poor. Those who have some experience of local authority work, and I am sure those who are acquainted with the work of the Ministry of Health, know quite well that these houses are usually the slummest of the slum. They were not originally constructed for a large number of families and to make them hygienically suitable for their new purpose would very frequently cost more than the erection of new houses. No one expects local authorities or anyone else to spend unnecessarily on the provision of shelters for the poor. Any old thing is supposed to do. So, no matter how far these fell short of human requirements, the poor were packed into them in a manner which resulted in an accumulation of disease and in unnecessary human distress. As I have said, this is only one
step further. Instead of asking the workers to be content with the leavings of the rich, they are now inviting them to be satisfied with the leavings of the animals. I do not know how long the Conservative party, on the slippery slope, may be content to rest even here. One day they may find fresh uses for their kennels, but for the moment, and perhaps only for the moment, a Conservative statesman, if I may paraphrase words well-known in English poetry, treats the agricultural labourer as
A little higher than his dog,
And a little lower than his horse.
Naturally, we cannot subscribe to such a policy. We rate the agricultural labourer a little higher than the horse, indeed, although hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite may regard it as extravagance and, perhaps, blasphemy, we rate the agricultural labourer as higher than the stockbroker and higher than the company promoter. In our opinion, he is more essential to the life of the nation, and being more essential to the life of the nation than either of the professional gentlemen to whom I have referred, he ought, in our opinion, to be at least equally well housed.

Major the Marquess of TITCHFIELD: Why does he always vote against you?

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: He knows who are his friends. That is why he votes against them.

Mr. WHEATLEY: Hon. Members opposite are naturally irritated at a public exposure of their real views regarding the treatment of the man from whom they obtain their daily bread. Some of them may be inclined to say that they agree with us that the agricultural labourer is worthy of a better dwelling than the one contemplated in this Resolution. They will, I hope, tell us that they agree with me that he is worthy of a better dwelling than the rejected stable of a horse—

Lieut. - Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: What authority has the right hon. Gentleman for saying this?

Mr. WHEATLEY: —or the out-house towards the conversion of which this money will probably be used. But they say that we must face the economic facts. Stockbrokers and company promoters have very good houses—

Major COLFOX: And trade union leaders!

Mr. WHEATLEY: — — because the economic facts of the present system entitle them to that type of house. They say, in regard to the agricultural labourer, that he must be prepared, like all other sections of the community, to face the economic facts in his desire for a higher standard of living. [An HON. MEMBER: "Hear, Hear!"] I am very glad that an hon. Member on the other side, speaking, I suppose, for his party, agrees to that being the view that is behind the Government. But this Resolution does not ask the agricultural labourer to face the economic facts. This is a Resolution which asks for a subsidy. The economic facts, as submitted by the party opposite, are that the farmers of this country cannot, out of the price which they obtain in a competitive system for their produce, pay a standard of wages that will enable their labourers to pay the economic rent of a healthy and a desirable house. That is the view of the party opposite, and I have no doubt that there is a considerable amount of substantial foundation for that view. I do not think that the farmers of this country have any monopoly of hard-heartedness. I believe that there must be among them many humane gentlemen who would prefer to pay £4 a week than 30s. a week to their labourers. But the party opposite would say that the economic facts are against them, and not only are they unable to pay anything like a decent living wage, but they are unable to pay the labourers the wages that would allow those labourers to pay the economic rent of even the very small houses that are provided for the working classes to-day; and so, instead of facing the economic facts, and saying to those labourers, "The economic conditions do not allow you to have any kind of house," they come and ask this Committee to vote national money to subsidise the agricultural industry to an extent that will enable it to house its workers according to the standard contemplated in this Resolution.
Had the Government or the party opposite stuck to the economic facts, could understand it, but this is not a Resolution based on recognition and acceptance of the economic facts; it is a Resolution that recognises but ignores the
economic facts, or, in so far as it does not ignore them, says, "The agricultural industry is essential to the life of the nation; the agricultural labourer is essential to the life of that industry; the industry itself, in a competitive system, cannot provide the requirements, even the very minimum requirements, of the agricultural labourer, and, therefore, we come to the whole nation, of which the agricultural industry is an essential part, and we ask the whole nation, out of its surplus, to provide the subsidy that will enable the agricultural labourer and the agricultural industry to live." That is the attitude of the Government; that is the policy adopted by the Government; and, as I have said, if they had stuck to an economic basis, one could have sympathised with their difficulties, but could have understood their policy.
I do not say that I am opposed to the general principle behind this Resolution. I am prepared to go very much further and to say I am prepared to accept it whole-heartedly. But what I do object to here is the particular form of this application. The Government ask us to provide money, and thereby to accept responsibility for the housing of the agricultural workers. They say, "The farmers can no longer accept the responsibility; we come here and we ask the State to provide money, and thereby to accept the responsibility, for the housing of these people." What I object to most strongly is that, while asking the State, or asking this Committee, to accept responsibility for the housing of these workers, they ask us to spend our money on houses such as these. If the State is to accept responsibility for housing agricultural workers, should not the State house those workers in a manner creditable to the State? And is anyone in any quarter of the Committee going seriously to argue that it will be to the credit of the State that these workers will be housed in the conditions in which they will domiciliarily exist when the provisions of this Resolution have been put into operation? It is not as if the State could not afford to house its agricultural workers properly. The State spends £300,000,000 in paying interest on the War debt to people who have surplus wealth. In my opinion, the agricultural labourer has a prior claim on the generosity of the State. We have millions
of people in this country, giving much less useful service to the country than the agricultural labourer, who revel in luxury and in surplus wealth. We on this side would use part of that surplus for the provision of a decent standard of living for that section of our workers who are probably the most useful in the maintenance of Britain's prosperity.
I want to say, in conclusion, that this policy is based on a. belief that there is no future for British agriculture. It is based on the idea that it is folly to provide new houses in those districts, and that, as the end of British agriculture is in view, you should devote a certain amount of public money to patching up the old houses, because they will serve the purpose for the short time for which houses will be required. That is a most pessimistic and, I submit, a most unpatriotic view to come from the party opposite. [An HON. MEMBER: "It comes from you!"] If I am wrong in my interpretation of the views of the party opposite—[An HON. MEMBER: "You are!"]—why should they not pursue a policy of erecting houses—[HON. MEMBERS: "We are!"] —healthy dwelling-houses in which we may have a healthy agricultural community half a century from now? Why should they be supporting a Government whose policy it is to withdraw the necessary financial support from the erection of new houses, and to divert only a part of it to the patching and maintenance of the old? It is because, in their soul, they know that the system for which they stand offers no permanency to Britain and no permanency to any of its particular industries. We on this side of the House take a more optimistic view of our country. We believe that the agricultural labourer will outlive the company promoter; we believe that, long after the company promoter has been forgotten, the agricultural labourer and this country will survive; and so, wishing to provide for the future of the agricultural industry, our policy is that public money, when it is to be spent, should be spent in the provision of new, healthy beautiful houses, to which the agricultural labourer, on account of his valuable service to the country, is entitled, and we wish to offer the most strenuous oppose-
tion to the standard of housing provided for in this Resolution.

Mr. ELLIS DAVIES: I am not interested in the imaginary stables which, according to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley), are to be found in our villages, but am much more concerned about the derelict houses and empty cottages which, unfortunately, are to be found in our rural districts. To give one instance, which may interest hon. Members above the Gangway, there are no fewer than 120 cottages which have become empty and derelict in a very small agricultural district within the short space of living memory, the whole population being, I believe, roughly speaking, under 3,000. I am concerned about those cases, and I think they need the first attention of the local authority. The right hon. Gentleman, however, made one remark which I think ought not to go unchallenged, because it would be apt to mislead the public. In talking about buildings, he rather suggested that, even when these are remodelled, they would still be unfit for habitation. It is, however, a direct provision of the Bill that the local authority must be satisfied—[Interruption.]—is it the case that hon. Members above the Gangway have no faith in democratic control?—that
the dwelling will after the completion of the works be in all respects fit for habitation as a dwelling by persons of the working classes.
The right hon. Gentleman suggested that the economic condition of the farmer will not allow him to pay a wage to the labourer which will enable him to pay an economic rent. I rather hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would have gone a little further, and would have told us what is his remedy for that position. We know the economic facts. They are exactly as the right hon. Gentleman suggested. The labourer's wage at the present moment is not such as will enable him to pay an economic rent on the present cost price of any building which is put up by way of a house. I am afraid I should be out of order in suggesting that the remedy proposed by the right hon. Gentleman would have been a duty which would have fallen on the urban dweller, and I will not pursue that. There are one or two practical points to which I should like to refer in con-
nection with the Bill itself. I understood from the Minister of Health that the Bill would provide for the building of houses, but, if I understand the Bill aright, it is a Bill for
the reconstruction and improvement of dwellings and other buildings.
There is another point that I should like cleared up, with regard to the repayment of loans. A grant, I understand, is not to be repaid, but, if a loan is made, then it is to be repaid. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the responsibility for the repayment is a personal one, or whether it is merely the value of the dwelling itself. A man obtains, say, a house which is covered by a mortgage. That mortgage contains two things. It contains, in the first place, an undertaking and covenant by the man to repay the money personally; and, in the second place, it contains a charge on the property itself as security for the repayment. I suggest, for the consideration of the right hon. Gentleman, that no house can at the present moment be put up in a rural district which will not be, in three or four years' time, of less value than the actual cost of its construction, and it is, therefore, rather important for the building owner to ascertain whether he will be personally responsible for the repayment of that loan regardless of the fact that, owing to economic causes, in all probability the value of the house itself will be a good deal less than the money which he has borrowed. My suggestion would have been that, instead of asking people to build houses themselves and take the whole risk, as I think they must under the provisions of this Bill, serious attempts should be made, at any rate in the rural districts and country villages, by the housing authority, to provide these houses itself at the cost of the State, and that the risk, which is a serious one, as to the value of the building in the next three or four years, should be undertaken by the State, and not by the individual.

Major G. F. DAVIES: I hope it is not unseemly for two Members who bear the same name to speak together on this matter. I cannot help thinking that those of us on this side who have had the pleasure of listening to the very humorous speech of the right hon. Gentleman the late Minister of Health,
will regret that his interventions in Debate of late have not been more frequent. We can only presume he meant to be taken as humorously as his speech sounded to those who listened to it. We could not help being reminded of two adages in the course of the stream of eloquent electioneering with which he favoured us, that no stream can rise higher than its source, and that "unstable as water thou shalt not excel." In his remarks, in which he went out of his way to twist everything in the Resolution and to try to bring in all manner of irrelevant material which could not possibly be affected by it, he spoke of owners, farmers and capitalists, but failed to give any consideration to that person in whose interest alone this Measure has been brought forward, that is, the tenant of cottages in agricultural areas. We have had various Housing Bills, which have, achieved unexpected success in the way of numbers and the short time in which they have been produced and in the fact that they have been largely produced by that section of the population who were most in need of assistance and improvement in their housing conditions.
But with all those Measures on the Statute Book, and all of them assisted, as in my opinion they needed to be in order to produce the results, by Government subsidies, we have found there has been one important part of the community which has been untouched, and that is the cottager employed largely in agricultural pursuits or others germane thereto and therefore in a similar economic position, and that after all is the outstanding consideration in regard to this Measure. Here is a large and essential portion of the population who have been untouched by the advantages which have been provided for every other branch of the country. That is not the fault of those who framed the Measures. We come back once again to the economic facts of the situation. Therefore what we need, it seems to me, to concentrate upon is not whether this is going to give some assistance to the wicked landowner, not whether it is going to bolster up the inefficient farmer, not whether this is going to convert stables into palaces, but whether it is going to any extent to improve the outlook for getting better cottages and
living conditions for those agricultural workers in the community, concerning who we do not talk such claptrap as we have already had to listen to, but whose interests we are much more familiar with and have much more seriously at heart than hon. Members opposite.
After all, the outstanding fact is that not only are new cottages not being built under these conditions, for very obvious reasons, but the available housing gets steadily worse for two or three reasons. One is that cottages are taken by such people as village policemen, employés of railway companies, industrial workers earning the better wages that industry, when it is not interfered with by senseless industrial disputes, is able to earn, and therefore the available supply of cottages for those for whom they were intended is constantly diminishing. We have also the week-ender, who comes in and buys one or perhaps two cottages, making them into one, and does his share in reducing the available housing for that section of the population towards which our efforts are directed to-day. Finally, we have this situation, that the unfortunate and much-criticised landlord, whose business, privilege and responsibility it has been in the past to provide houses for the agricultural worker, has been put in a position, on account of the depredations of successive Chancellors of the Exchequer, that he can no longer carry out those responsibilities, much as he wishes to do so. Even the Leader of His Majesty's Opposition, not very long ago in a public speech, said precisely what I have been saying just now and said that was a reason, among others, why his conclusion was that there should be nationalisation of the land and the State should come in and do it all for them. We on this side of the House do not believe in that form of legislation, but we are faced with conditions that need to be dealt with.
How can we apply to the agricultural worker in the rural districts those housing benefits which have been secured for others by existing measures. It seems to me that this is an extraordinary hopeful line of advance though I do not think anyone suggests it is going to solve the question. There are large numbers of people, large and small, perhaps just the
owners of one or two cottages, who see them deteriorating but cannot afford to make the proper repairs and they are rapidly becoming untenantable. Compared with them a good sanitary cow stall would be an infinitely better habitation. If that kind of thing can be checked, if sufficient assistance can be given to the owner to enable him to contribute a certain portion towards building, assisted by local authorities and the State for the other two-thirds, I look to see in a reasonably short time a material improvement, by means of the financial measures in this Bill, in the condition and the improvement of the houses of our agricultural workers. I am satisfied that if we, who are closely interested in and connected with the land, are given opportunities, not only such as this, but others which may perhaps be discovered by experience to be wise and applicable, if they come within the limits of economic laws, can improve the housing conditions of workers in the rural areas and prevent their cottages being taken by others who are more fortunate and can pay higher rentals for them, we shall have gone a long way towards securing an improvement of the general conditions of the countryside which will stem the drift from the country to the town and keep those who were born in the country and know it and love it in those surroundings where they are best able to develop their manhood and their life.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: I am glad the Government have had finally to do what we said it was necessary to do. The hon. and gallant Gentleman who has just spoken referred to senseless industrial disputes. If he referred to the present dispute, I would remind him that it was not the miners who locked out the coal-owners but the coalowners who locked out the miners. But it was not for that purpose that I rose. My mind is exercised as to the scope of this Measure. The Resolution refers to
persons whose economic condition is substantially the same as that of such workers.
In the mining world the owners are, or ought to be, responsible for the housing of their workers. I have to admit that for the last 10 or 15 years they have forgotten their responsibilities, and have not found houses for the workers but have given them some financial assistance in place of free houses. There are thousands
of houses in our mining villages that are wholly unfit for human habitation, and have been condemned by the local authorities, but because there was no other place to house the people, they have had to exist there all these years. If agricultural labourers can earn, as I have been told, 35s. to £2 a week, at least two-thirds of the married workers in the coalfields in Durham are in a worse position, so that if it is based on the economic conditions of the people who inhabit the houses the Bill must of necessity take in all these houses owned by colliery owners in the villages. I want the right hon. Gentleman to think what he is doing. They talk of the conversion of stables into houses, but no sensible man would put a dog in some of the houses the miners have to live in in Durham. People live there because their economic condition will not allow them to pay for a house elsewhere. I am afraid the right hon. Gentleman is taking on something larger than the Bill intended. I do not want these miserable dens patched up. That would be adding insult to injury. The position he ought to take up as a sensible Minister would be to get rid of these houses and build new ones in their place. Patching them up will not mend matters and will mean that this state of things will be perpeutated. The proposals of the Bill will give no relief to the tenants and the whole of the money that is spent will be entirely in the interest of those who own the houses.

Sir HARRY HOPE: As the representative of a county constituency I give this Resolution my whole-hearted support, because I know that in our country districts there are two things needed. We need more houses for our rural population and better houses than we have already got. This Financial Resolution deals with that matter. It proposes to enable our existing houses to be improved. Can anyone with a practical knowledge of our country districts and our rural life deny the fact that there are many houses, I know there are in Scotland, in regard to which if they were reconditioned, and improved, the people living in them would not only have far more inducement to remain on in our country districts, but they would be able to spend happier and healthier lives. This Financial Resolution deserves the whole-hearted support of everyone who
has a desire to help the rural life of our country.
The right hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley) in bringing forward his criticism of the Resolution, made a great deal of the point that in the wording of the Resolution it might be permissible for stables to be converted into dwelling-houses. I am sure that the intention of the Government is not in that direction. The intention of the Government is to enable funds to be made available whereby our existing houses can be reconstructed and improved for the benefit of the people. In basing criticism of this Resolution merely upon the fact that it may be permissible to turn an outhouse or a stable into a dwelling-house, is going very far beyond what was really meant. The right hon. Gentleman surely, when he condemns public money being used as a subsidy for improving the houses in our country districts, forgets what we have been doing in the matter of housing reform during the last four or five years. He himself has been responsible for bringing in and passing an Act whereby public money was given as a subsidy for houses in our towns and cities. Is it not right that our country districts should get a share of these public favours? It is because by this Resolution I see a prospect of our country districts getting some of the benefits which our towns and cities have, rightly, had in the past, that, as a county Member, I support it in a wholehearted manner.
The position of agriculture is a very large question, and to discuss it would go beyond this Resolution; but we all know that the condition of agriculture hitherto has been such that the workers engaged in it cannot pay an economic rent for the houses in which they live. Surely, when we desire to improve the housing conditions of these people, we need to face the facts as they are and, recognising that an economic rent is not possible in agriculture under our present system, is it not right that we should take the next best step and try, by a moderate and safe means, to bring practical benefits to these most worthy people in regard to their houses. As the representative of a county constituency in Scotland, I am sure that this Financial Resolution and the Bill which will be based upon it will be wholeheartedly approved, and if hon. Members opposite desire to oppose the Bill I can
assure them that if they go to the country districts in Scotland they will meet with very little support. We can do a useful little piece of business by approving of this Resolution and passing the Bill, and thereby bringing health, happiness and comfort to many deserving people in our country districts.

Mr. A. GREENWOOD: I beg to move, in line 7, after the word "expenses," to insert the words "not exceeding one hundred thousand pounds."
As you, Sir, have ruled out of order the Amendment standing in the name of two of my hon. Friends, I move the Amendment which stands in my name. It will be observed by those who have read the Resolution that there is no limit of expenditure which may be incurred under it. In moving this Amendment to put some prescribed maximum upon the amount which shall be contributed by Parliament, I feel sure that I shall have with me hon. Members sitting on other side of the House. This Resolution: is one of which in principle we do not approve, but there is another reason why some definite limit should be put upon the amount to be expended. Hon. Members opposite for a considerable time have been anxiously pursuing economy. Numerous efforts have been made by the Government this year to reduce national expenditure. The financial straits of the Government have been so serious that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was impelled to put his hand into the pockets of several funds and extract money to enable him to carry out his responsibilities.
The financial straits of the Government were so serious that they decided to reduce the State contribution to health and unemployment insurance. In view of so serious a situation, it seems inconsistent and illogical on the part of the Government to come to the House with a new form of expenditure such as has been unknown in this country previously. Moreover, the Minister of Health is now engaged in manipulating a decrease in the contributions to be made by the State under the existing housing schemes. If it be necessary to reduce the subsidies under the Acts of 1923 and 1924 at this stage, it seems to be highly objectionable that whilst he is, so to
speak, with one hand negotiating a decrease in respect of new houses for the country as a whole, he should, on the other hand, be negotiating expenditure on old houses in the country side. When we have such a position, it cannot be defended. If the financial position of the Government is so serious that it feels called upon to reduce the subsidy for new houses that are being built in towns and country districts alike, it surely is most inexpedient at the same time to provide a subsidy for rural landlords.
Another reason why we would reduce the subsidy is that it appears to us to be a form of unconditional gift to people who can well afford to do without it. It has always been assumed in our previous housing subsidies that such subsidies were given in respect of houses that would not or could not otherwise be built. Many cases, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, have arisen where some enthusiastic person has begun to build a house, and the subsidy has been denied on the ground that as he begun to build the house it would have been built in any case, and, therefore the subsidy could not be paid. That sort of principle, if the Government persist in this policy, ought to be applied to the rural landlord. No one will deny that a large number of rural landlords can well afford to put their cottages into a proper state of repair. Some of them have done so, and more could do so if they were driven to do it, and the law was enforced. Is it right that these people should be subsidised by the State? I think it cannot be defended. Certainly, it cannot he defended as an act by an economy Government.
There are clearly two sets of cases. There are those landlords who can well afford to improve their cottages and those who cannot. Our submission is that no money should be spent on the former; that the law should be enforced against them, just as it is enforced in some degree against the town landlord. As regards those who cannot afford to put their houses into a state of repair, again we see no reason why public money should be spent upon them if those houses remain in the present hands. If these landlords over a long series of years have permitted their cottages to get into a state of disrepair so serious that they may be permitted to spend under the
Bill large sums of money upon them, what guarantee have we that once the cottages have been put into a state of repair, these people are going to be in a position to keep them in a proper state of repair. There is no reason to suppose that whatever. All that this money will do will be to pass over to a number of landlords who cannot fulfil their responsibilities money which will enable them to tinker up their houses prior to another period of general decay.
If it be true that the rural landlord is in dire necessity and must receive financial assistance, surely a case equally strong can be made out for many landlords of urban dwellings. I would go so far as to say that the neediest landlords to-day are among the small landlords in the towns. No one in any part of the House would dream of coming here with a Money Resolution to permit these town landlords to dip their hands into the public purse in order to put their cottages into order. This money will go as a sort of generous gift to a particular kind of bad landlord, those who fail to keep their cottages in repair in the countryside. I hope that the Committee will see the wisdom of putting some limit upon the right hon. Gentleman's expenditure in this matter. He has established a certain condition. He has put a maximum in the case of each house; but no one knows the number of houses that are to be repaired or how many outhouses are to be converted into cottages. It may well be that the landlords will succeed in restoring their cottages at an enormous public expense, if this proposal were carried out on a large scale. We think that some definite figure should be put into the Bill in order that a limit should be placed upon this public expenditure.
I put this test of economy to hon. Members opposite as a very real one. They have an opportunity under this Amendment of proving whether they believe in economy or whether they do not believe in economy. They have an opportunity of showing whether they believe in economy of a real kind or whether they are only prepared to sanction economy at the expense of the workers. At a time when our national situation in regard to finance is so serious as to warrant the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the steps he has taken
this year at the expense of the masses of the people of this country, the expenditure proposed under this Resolution is entirely unwarranted, and a severe limit should be placed upon the expenditure permitted to the Minister.

5.0 P.M.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: If I thought that the Amendment meant what it said, I should characterise the hon. Member's speech as being quite phenomenal in its irrelevance, but it is perfectly obvious that the object of the Amendment is to try to wreck the Bill. Taking the actual wording of the Amendment, it proposes that the whole cost to the Exchequer shall not exceed £100,000, although the hon. Member must have read—I presume he has read—the White Paper, in which it is stated it is estimated that, giving an average cost per house of £75 and the number of houses totalling 20,000, the cost would be £60,000 a year for 20 years.

Mr. GREENWOOD: That is only an assumption.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: May I ask the hon. Member, for the sake of information, whether his £100,000 is meant to be a total sum or £100,000 per annum?

Mr. GREENWOOD: It is intended to be a total sum.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: That confirms what I have said, that the Amendment is intended to wreck the Bill. The zeal for economy on the part of the hon. Member comes very strangely from him. What would have been the alternative to this Bill in the proposals of his own Government? There would have been a subsidy of £12 10s. for each house in an agricultural parish for 40 years, so that there would have been a total sum expended, if 20,000 houses were built, of £2,500,000 for 40 years. Did the hon. Gentleman's zeal for economy induce him to put any limit into the Financial Resolution on which his own Bill was founded? That is really a trivial and empty excuse. He says that the subsidy is to be given to the wrong people; but the limitation of the sum that can be expended does not alter the foundation of the subsidy, and, if that is really a serious argument on his part, then it is irrelevant. When he says it is to be given to the wrong people, what authority has he for making a statement of that kind? He says there is a great
number of landlords who could perfectly well afford to put their houses in order. If that be so, they will be known to the local authorities. I would remind the hon. Gentleman and the Committee that, in the Bill there is a provision which says that the local authorities may, in certain cases, refuse to give assistance under the Bill, and a proper ground for refusal would be that the assistance is not required, and that the owner is capable of putting the house in order. As a matter of fact, to anyone who goes about the country and looks with a careful and attentive eye at the houses in the country districts, it will be obvious that it is always the large landlords who keep their houses in good condition, and that the houses which are in bad condition are not the houses belonging to the great squires and the landlords against whom the hon. Member has such a prejudice; these belong to the small people who are without resources. It is unfortunate that the party opposite are so obsessed with their prejudice against landlords in general that they never have room or time to spare for the consideration of the circumstances of the poor landlords.
We are told that people will not be able to keep their repaired houses in proper order. There, again, that is a pure assumption, and anyone who knows the probabilities of the case will agree that it is a very improbable one. The difficulty now is that, having passed through extremely hard times, landlords have not been able to repair the houses at the moment when repairs would have been comparatively cheap and simple; they have got past that stage, and the houses are in such a condition that only a considerable amount of expenditure—more than can lie found by people of small means—will really do any good. Once you put them into proper order, the amount required to keep the houses in order is really quite small, and I think it will not be outside the resources of the people concerned to afford that amount. In any case, even if there should be some particular instances where, in spite of this assistance, the houses do gradually decay, surely, that is no reason why we should deny to thousands of agricultural labourers the opportunity offered by this Bill of at last coming into occupation of really decent
and comfortable habitations. In regard to the question of a limit upon the amount of money which can be demanded from the Exchequer, there is really, for all practical purposes in the Bill now, such a limitation in the fact which I mentioned when I was introducing the Resolution, namely, that the operation of the Bill is limited to five years. In five years, and especially in country places where matters do not proceed with what may be called giddy rapidity, one may be quite certain that the expenditure that may be asked from the Exchequer will not be excessive. But what one can say is that, whatever the expenditure is, the houses that will be repaired and reconditioned and made suitable for habitation by agricultural labourers under this Bill will cost infinitely less than new houses provided by the assistance of the Exchequer.

Mr. FENBY: I can understand anyone not being particularly enthusiastic about the Resolution, but I am at a loss to understand anyone being violently opposed to its object. I am all in favour of economy, but I am not in favour of cutting down expenditure on housing. In my opinion, money expended on improving the housing of the working classes is money very well spent indeed. As far as the Amendment is concerned, in my opinion, there is not the slightest need to put in any limit to the amount that should be spent. I have had considerable experience of local authorities at the present time, and there is no authority suffering more from "hard-uppishness" than the rural local authorities, and when these authorities have to provide an amount equal to that provided by the Exchequer they will not be lavish in their expenditure. This is described as a "landlords' relief Bill." The landlord is sometimes like a red rag to a good many people, but I am not concerned about that; I am concerned about the agricultural labourer, and I cannot understand anyone who knows anything about the conditions of rural housing being violently opposed to the proposals in this Bill. It may be that it is too limited and, in my opinion, its operation will be very slow. But anything that will improve the housing accommodation of the agricultural labourers will have my enthusiastic and full support.
There is a proposal in regard to other buildings, and I do not know if I am in order in discussing it.

The CHAIRMAN: No, I am afraid not.

Mr. FENBY: What I want to say, in conclusion, is that the difficulty in rural areas to-day has arisen because there was a lack of building of rural cottages prior to the War. When we are confronted, as members of local authorities are, with very serious financial proposals with regard to education and health and so many other things, I am certain that the local authorities themselves will be afraid of the operation of this Bill. What I would have liked would have been, instead of a limitation on the amount that is to be spent, to have seen the contribution of the local authority made a little less and the contribution of the State a little more. If that had been done the operation would have been much more speedy. So far as the principle of the Bill and of the financial Resolution is concerned, I am certainly against limiting the operation of it, and I hope that the local authorities will work it enthusiastically so far as their financial resources will allow.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: On the Second Reading of the Bill I expressed my view that it would bring more happiness and comfort to our rural areas than any proposals which have been made for some yearn I am not going to repeat that, but I am very glad the Minister has refused to accept any limitation of the money that is to be spent under this Bill. I am very anxious to see the homes of the agricultural workers improved and brought up-to-date. I am so anxious that the money shall not be curtailed and that the good that may be done by this Bill shall not be limited, that I would like to see the limitation of £400 on the value of the house after improvements are made, enlarged to £500. Therefore, I want to ask you, Mr. Chairman, as a point of Order, whether the wording of the Financial Resolution is such as to prevent me raising this question on the Committee stage with a view to enlarging the £400 to £500.

The CHAIRMAN: Certainly not. No private Member can in any circumstances propose the increase of an Exchequer grant beyond the amount authorised.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I was rather afraid that would be your view, but I was not sure whether I could not propose on this Financial Resolution an Amendment which would have laid the foundations for my being able to increase this figure.

The CHAIRMAN: No. All that a private Member can do is to speak on the Resolution at large, but he can urge the Government to bring in another one.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Perhaps the hon. Baronet will allow me to repeat what I said when possibly he was not in the House, when I was proposing the Resolution. I then explained that I have deliberately left out of the Resolution the conditions which are to be found in the Bill limiting the value of the house to £400. I then said that I desired to leave a freer hand to the Committee, if possible, to discuss the matter.

The CHAIRMAN: I must now qualify what I have said. I assumed from what the hon. Baronet said that there was this limitation in the Resolution, but as there is not, it is not for me to guide the Chairman of the Committee upstairs as to whether it will be right for him to accept such an Amendment or not.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I had some idea that this difficulty might occur when I raised the matter in the Committee upstairs, and I wished to consult you with a view to enlarging the Resolution so that there should be no doubt about the position in the Committee stage. I shall, however, be quite content if I can convince the Minister of Health of the advantage and necessity of increasing this limit of £400 and £500 so that he himself may be able to move the Amendment which I thought I might possibly have moved myself.

The CHAIRMAN: I have no jurisdiction over the Committee upstairs to which this Bill will go, and, therefore, I cannot say what view the Chairman of the Committee may take. When I gave my former ruling, I had omitted to notice for the moment that this particular restriction was not contained in the Resolution, but anything that I say cannot prejudge what the Chairman of the Committee upstairs may say.

Mr. HARNEY: The right hon. Gentleman said just now that the figure £400 was not in the Resolution but in the Bill, and I desire to ask whether that £400 is merely there as a definition and has nothing to do with the amount of money that may or may not be granted?

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is again asking me to rule something which must be decided by the Chairman of the Committee upstairs. We are not in Committee on the Bill, but on the Resolution, and no ruling of mine is binding on the Chairman of the Committee which will consider the Bill.

Mr. HARNEY: I rather understood from the Minister that it was hoped to move in Committee an enlargement of the figure. The figure £400 is not in the Resolution, and I was merely pointing out that the £400 in the Bill is merely intended as a definition and has nothing to do with the amount of money that may or may not be granted.

The CHAIRMAN: That is not a matter on which I can give a ruling.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I do not want to be too persistent but if the Bill goes to the Committee in its present form and I attempt to move an increase from £400 to £500, it seems that I shall be met by the Chairman with the view that I, as a private Member, cannot move that increase because I shall be putting a charge on the taxpayer. I could see no answer to that except this, that as the Financial Resolution is now before the Committee, it might be possible for me to move an Amendment that would put in express words limiting the amount to at least £500, and then it would bring my proposed Amendment within the purview of the Chairman of the Committee upstairs. That is what I really wanted to consult you upon.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member cannot move anything outside the King's recommendation. The King's recommendation limits the Resolution, and that limit cannot be extended.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I want, therefore, to urge on the Minister that he should Consider carefully before this Bill goes to the Committee whether he will not take steps to increase this limit to £500. I can assure him that in very many parts of the country, more particularly those
parts which are not quite so rural as the purely agricultural districts, like parts of Lincolnshire and the Eastern Counties, the amount of £400 will limit this Bill to a very small number of houses. I hope he will consider this and if necessary either bring in a fresh Resolution or propose an Amendment to the present one.

Mr. RILEY: I rise to support the Amendment to limit the Financial Resolution to £100,000, not because I am opposed to doing anything that can be done to improve rural housing or increase the supply of suitable housing, but because the method which is proposed in this Resolution is, in my view, entirely contrary to justifiable public policy. The Resolution, as it stands, in spite of what the Minister has said, gives a blank cheque to local authorities, subject to some control by the Exchequer, to draw indefinitely upon the taxpayer and the ratepayer for money to expend on private property; not to create any public property at all. Some hon. Members opposite have challenged the Opposition as to their sincerity in the matter of houses for the agricultural classes. If any test of that sincerity is required, it is found in the fact that the Opposition, when it was the Government, through its Minister of Health, brought forward a Bill, which became law, giving rural authorities £1 10s. per annum on each house, on the sound and justifiable principle of public policy, that these houses when built would be public and not private property. The justification for the Amendment is that the Resolution seeks to give power to levy a tax on the taxpayer and ratepayer in order to create property which, when created, will be private and not public property. On that ground it is very essential that the Committee should move warily, and if the move is made at all that the country should know the extent of its liability.
What are the facts of the case as far as the Resolution is concerned? They are these. The Minister of Health has said that as far as the Resolution is concerned, and also the Bill when it is passed, it will provide that the three partners to the transaction will contribute a maximum of £50 each to any one single dwelling. The local authority may make a grant to a maximum of £100. To that amount the Exchequer will contribute half, and the owner must contribute not less than £50 on that basis.
It sounds very nice to say that the three partners are all bearing their share. But what really occurs is this, that the private owner gets two shares from the public, £50 from the State and £50 from the local ratepayer, in order to build up is own private property. That is what is behind this Resolution. Let me call the attention of the Committee to what is really going to occur. You have a rural area occupied largely by the ordinary rural population, agricultural labourers and other workmen. They form 80 or 90 per cent. of the population, and they are people who own no property at all. They are simply tenants and labourers on farms. But they are also ratepayers. Then you have, say, 10 per cent. who are property owners. Some may be large landowners, some large farmers, and others people who are comparatively well-to-do who have retired o the village and reside there. They form a very small number of the population. But under this Bill and Resolution you are going to ask the 80 per cent. of the population who own no property it all to pay rates in order to find the money to create property for the 10 per cent. of the population. It is a perfectly unjustifiable proposal.
Again, take the question of buildings which do not actually exist now as dwellings. There is no doubt whatever, he Minister has said so, that the Bill does enable buildings which are not louses now to be transformed into dwelling-houses and so obtain the benefits of bile provisions of this Resolution.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): I think we can discusss that better on the next Amendment.

Mr. RILEY: Yes, but I want to deal with the financial aspect. In many villages you have rents which vary from 1s. to 5s. and possibly 6s. per week. It is perfectly true that the Resolution provides that in the case of houses of that nature receiving the benefits of this grant the owner cannot put on more than a certain fixed amount to the rent. But you have also those buildings which are not used now as dwellings, and which are not worth Is. or Is. 6d. per week for the purpose for which they are used at present. Under this Bill they may be transformed into dwellings and may be
let at rents of 4s., 5s. and 6s. per week. They will be made capable of earning that rent because of the subsidy given to them from the rates and taxes. Thus the owners of this kind of property will enjoy a 10 per cent. return on their money. That is perfectly obvious, and it is because of this danger that we want to tie the Resolution down to a maximum of £100,000.

Colonel CROOKSHANK: It will be interesting to study the speeches of the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. A. Greenwood) and of the right hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley) in the OFFICIAL REPORT to-morrow, as the first, in moving the Amendment, to limit the sum available, agreed with the scheme, while the second criticised the Tory party for economy (in not spending a sum greatly in excess on other schemes), but objected to the scheme. I trust that they will be, able to reconcile those conflicting views in the Lobby. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shettleston displayed an entire lack of technical knowledge, and at the same time he showed very small appreciation of the economic facts. Not to make use of a very large number of distinctly satisfactory buildings which exist, particularly in Scotland—of which he has some knowledge presumably—would be a crime, for, as the Minister has said, very rightly, this sort of work can be done very cheaply in such cases. As to the use of stables, I should have thought it would be desirable to use any structures which were satisfactory. As a technical man myself, formerly a military engineer, I might mention that I once converted cavalry barracks to infantry barracks, and then reconverted them to cavalry barracks. No one with technical knowledge or any idea of finance would suggest pulling such buildings down and building new ones. The Committee may recognise that the conversion of stables has been used by hon. Members opposite merely as a, term of reproach, without any regard for their value as structures.
All will agree that this Bill is a great boon. I would ask that any member of a local authority should be immune if he receives the subsidy; he should not have to surrender his seat on the county council as a result of a desire to improve his workers' conditions. It is not quite
clear whether a district council—if it is the housing authority—or only the county council can raise funds for the purpose, which is important in this connection.

The CHAIRMAN: References to county councils and district councils are not in order on this Amendment, which deals only with the question of contributions from the Exchequer.

Colonel CROOKSHANK: I am sorry if I have gone beyond the bounds of order. I trust that the Government may be encouraged to produce other Resolutions, and, if the amount is to be limited, as has been suggested by hon. Members opposite, I trust that the Government will produce a Resolution to grant funds for improving water supply and drainage in rural districts. These things cannot be carried out in all cases under this scheme, particularly if all the money has been entirely expended on improving the accommodation. This applies particularly to new houses, on which so much stress has been laid by the right hon. Member for Shettleston and other hon. Members opposite. New houses may have been erected in country districts, but there are no funds available for providing proper water supply and drainage unless the rating is increased so that, if it be a question of limiting expenditure, I trust that the Minister will see his way to allot funds for those purposes. Incidentally, a great deal of stress has been laid by hon. Members opposite on the subject of increasing the rates. I trust that this expenditure will not have the effect of increasing the rating on those buildings to which it has been applied.

Mr. HARNEY: This is a Resolution to enable the Exchequer to make certain grants for the purpose of carrying out the scheme of the Bill. The scheme of the Bill is that the local authority shall be empowered, first by means of grants, and, secondly, by means of loans, to help the rehabilitation of the structure of a certain class of house. I am entirely in favour of the principle of the Bill and against the Amendment. It seems to me that it is purely a wrecking Amendment. At the same time, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to a couple of defects in the Bill to which this money
Resolution relates. As regards the grant that the local authorities can make, it is provided that—

The CHAIRMAN: That would not be in order on this particular Amendment. The only question is whether the Exchequer contribution shall or shall not be limited to £100,000.

Mr. HARNEY: In whatever else I have to say I hope that I shall keep within the rules of order. I think there should be no limitation placed upon the grant, and for this reason: The Bill provides that a certain kind of house is to fall within its operation, and it is quite obvious that in the limited period of five years the amount cannot be very great. I think no limitation should be placed upon it. Since the power given to local authorities is to make not only grants but loans, it is desirable that the grant should be, if anything, made greater than that which the Bill provides. As to the assistance given by way of loans, there will be a difficulty. If a local authority is empowered to make a loan on the terms of the Bill by way of mortgage, to be repaid by instalments, the person who obtains a loan is under a personal liability, and I am certain that, under those circumstances, with the possibility of a house deteriorating in value at the time the loan may be called in until it is infinitely less than the amount of the loan, the loan will prove a dead letter. The loan provisions will be unworkable if they are to be by way of mortgage. But the grant provisions will be workable, and there is no reason why the whole thing should not be done by way of grant. If the tenant does not comply with the conditions prescribed the money ran he called in, even though it is a grant.

Lieut.-Colonel GADIE: It appears to me that there has been a want of sincerity on the other side in discussing this question. The right hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley) has said that stables might be converted into dwelling-houses, and he stressed that point materially.

The CHAIRMAN: That question is not in order on this Amendment. The only question here is whether the expenditure by the Exchequer should or should not be limited to £100,000.

Lieut.-Colonel GADIE: In asking that the amount should be limited to £100,000, I think even the Mover of the Amendment must agree that that sum would get us nowhere at all. Either the money is worth spending as proposed in the Bill, or the Government had better drop the proposal. The great difficulty is to get houses in the agricultural districts. One right hon. Gentleman said that the money will go to the landlords. Another hon. Gentleman opposite said we are giving a blank check to local authorities. I have never heard such suspicion of local authorities expressed before in this House. I have always understood that if we gave local authorities the power to do anything, we could trust them with the work. There is no local authority which would attempt to pass dwellings such as we have had sketched this afternoon. If it is intended that local authorities should either buy or make new structures, there may be something in the argument. Whatever the Opposition may say, this is the one want that has not been met up to the present. Other Bills with money have been passed, making grants for alterations for existing houses. I take it that this Bill simply means to say that. May I ask hon. Members opposite for once to drop this criticism and let us get back to the real want. This Bill is the only one, so far, that will meet the agricultural labourers' needs. The question as to whether the money will be well spent I think is well answered by the protection provided on page 5 of the Bill, where it says that no more than 3 per cent. can be asked for the money and that the normal rent of an agricultural dwelling is the standard rent under the Bill. Therefore, there can be no robbery by the private owner.

Mr. VIANT: Statements have been made by hon. Members opposite as to want of sincerity on the part of those who have spoken from this side in support of the Amendment. I support the Amendment, and I want it to be understood that I am quite sincere about it. The Committee is entitled to know from the Minister what the financial commitments are likely to be. The Minister is asking for a blank cheque. Personally, I have never interpreted the desire of the electorate to send me here to be such that they would be prepared for me to vote for a blank cheque for any Department.

Sir K. WOOD: There was an exactly similar Resolution in the 1924 Bill.

Mr. VIANT: We had then some idea as to the number of houses that were needed by the community. We have an idea of the need of the community now. When we were voting on that occasion we were voting, not to hand money over to private persons, but in favour of the creation of assets for the community. I support the Amendment because I am firmly convinced that we ought to know exactly to what we are being committed. We are asked to hand over a blank cheque, not only to the Departments, but to those who are interested in putting their property into repair in the agricultural areas. What have we in return? [HON. MEMBERS: "A good house."] We have not a good house. We have no guarantee even that the agricultural labourer is to have a good house. It has been said that we doubt the local authorities. We have reason to doubt many of the bounty authorities which will administer this Act. We know the composition of the county authorities. Labour representation is exceedingly scarce there. Many of those who have this dilapidated property will be members of the county authority. They will be handing money over to themselves, and the ratepayers and the national Exchequer are to foot the bill. That is grossly unfair. We are asking for nothing unfair in demanding that the Department shall give us at least some idea as to the liability of the local ratepayers and the Exchequer in this matter. I am opposed to spending money in this way. If we are to put this property into repair, we should he entitled to draw the rent of this property until we have reimbursed our expenditure. That is a fair proposition. We on this side cannot be accused of want of consideration for the interests of the agricultural labourer. The Minister of Health this afternoon said that this Bill, in all probability, would mean an expenditure of £600,000. Our commitments in respect of rural housing, under the 1924 Act, would, he said, amount to £2,500,000.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: A year.

Mr. VIANT: We have at least something to show for that expenditure, even if it is £2,500,000. We have an economic asset for the community. We have no economic asset for the community as a
result of this expenditure. I am opposed to handing over public funds to private persons. The agricultural labourer could have been housed under the 1924 Act far better than he is going to be housed under the provisions of this Measure. In all probability, the property on which this money is going to be expended is property which will not be worth the expenditure. On those grounds I think we are entitled to ask for more information than has yet been given by the Department concerned.

Major GLYN: The hon. Gentleman who has just sat down said the Committee was entitled to have some idea as to what are the limits of public expenditure for this particular type of housing and he also referred to the benefits that would result by spending £2,500,000 a year for 42 years, as was proposed by the Government when his own party was in power. I think he forgets that the difficulty lies not only in the matter of £ s. d. but in the matter of getting the houses built. If we could have the houses put up more quickly in the rural areas it would be a good deal easier to deal with this matter, but owing to the difficulties of communication building cannot be carried on as quickly in the rural as in urban areas. The Amendment before the Committee asks that the expenditure should be limited to £100,000. The White Paper estimates that £60,000 a year for 20 years will be expended on this scheme.

Mr. RILEY: May I suggest that the White Paper distinctly conveys the impression that the figure mentioned is

only an example of how the scheme will work on both sides. It does not meat that this sum is to be the total commitment.

Major GLYN: I quite agree that the statement is an indication, and I think the Committee ought to ask the Parliamentary Secretary if he is quite satisfied that the system on which this public expenditure is going to be made, is satisfactory as regards the way in which the property is balanced. Everything turns on the way the property is balanced. In this Financial Resolution the matter is left very wide and, as you, Sir, have said, it cannot be discussed at this juncture. What is not left very wide is the defining of the method of valuation. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether with regard to Clause 2 (a)—although it is not referred to directly in the Financial Resolution—he will not consider suggesting that the valuation should be made by district valuers and not left as it is under the present wording.

The CHAIRMAN: That point does not arise on this particular Amendment.

Major GLYN: I think that would be one way of limiting the expenditure. Nothing would be more fatal than to limit the expenditure to £100,000. On the other hand, if you have a proper uniform system of valuation you will be sure that the public money is being spent in a proper and uniform manner.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 80; Noes, 256.

Division No. 461.]
AYES.
[5.52 p.m.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Duncan, C.
Lunn, William


Ammon, Charles George
Gardner, J. P.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gosling, Harry
March, S.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James


Baker, Walter
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Montague, Frederick


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Groves, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Batey, Joseph
Grundy, T. W.
Naylor, T. E.


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Palin, John Henry


Bondfield, Margaret
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) 
Paling, W.


Bromfield, William
Hayday, Arthur
Ponsonby, Arthur


Bromley, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Potts, John S.


Buchanan, G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Richardson, K. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Riley, Ben


Close, W. S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Ritson, J.


Compton, Joseph
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)


Cove, W. G.
Kelly, W. T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Scrymgeour, E.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lawrence, Susan
Scurr, John


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lawson, John James
Sexton, James


Day, Colonel Harry
Lee, F.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Dennison, R.
Lowth, T.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Thurtle, Ernest
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Townend, A. E.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Viant, S. P.
Windsor, Walter


Stamford, T. W.
Wellhead, Richard C.



Taylor, R. A.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Whiteley, W.
Hayes.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-colonel
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vera


Albery, Irving James
Ellis, R. G.
Lynn, Sir R. J.


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Elveden, Viscount
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Atholl, Duchess of
England, Colonel A.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Macintyre, Ian


Balniel, Lord
Everard, W. Lindsay
McLean, Major A.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Falls, Sir Bertram G.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Fenby, T. D.
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Fielden, E. B.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Bellairs, Commander Canyon W.
Finburgh, S.
Malone, Major P. B.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Bennett, A. J.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Margesson, Capt. D.


Bethel, A.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Betterton, Henry B.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Meyer, Sir Frank.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-


Boothby, R. J. G.
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Ganzoni, Sir John
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Gates, Percy
Monsell, Eyres, Com, Rt. Hon. B. M.


Braithwaite, A. N.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)


Brass, Captain W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Murchison, C. K.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon William Clive
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Neville, R. J.


Briggs. J. Harold
Goff, Sir Park
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Briscoe, Richard George
Grace, John
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hon. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Graham, Frederick F. (Cumb'ld., N.)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Brown-Lindsay, Major H.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Owen, Major G.


Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'tb'l'd., Hexham)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Brown, Brig-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Perring, Sir William George


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Peto, G. (Somerset. Frame)


Bullock, Captain M.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Pielou, D. P.


Burman, J. B.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Harney, E. A.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Harris, Percy A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hartington, Marquess of
Preston, William


Campbell, E. T.
Haslam, Henry C.
Price, Major C. W. M.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Radford, E. A.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Raine, W.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Heneage, Lieut.-Cot. Arthur P.
Ramsden, E.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., scar. Wh'by)
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Christie, J. A.
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Remnant, Sir James


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Holland, Sir Arthur
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Clarry, Reginald George
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Clayton, G. C.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Ropner, Major L.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Rye, F. G.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hurd, Percy A.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hurst, Gerald B.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Cooper, A. Duff
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sandon, Lord


Cope, Major William
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Savery, S. S.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shaw, Lt -Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jackson. Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Jacob, A. E.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Jephcott, A. R.
Skelton, A. N.


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smith. R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Smithers, Waldron


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Kenyon, Barnet
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Lister, Cunliffe., Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Livingstone, A. M.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Storry-Deans, R.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Drewe, C.
Loder, J. de V.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Duckworth. John
Lord. Walter Greases
Stuart, Crichton., Lord C.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lougher, L.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lowe, Sir Francis William
Tasker, Major R. Inigo




Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Warrender, Sir Victor
Withers, John James


Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)
Wolmer, Viscount


Thomson, Trevelyan (Middiesbro, W.)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Watts, Dr. T.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Tinne, J. A.
Wiggins, William Martin
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall. Northern)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)


Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)



Waddington, R.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Wallace, Captain D. E.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Windsor-Clive Lieut.-Colonel George
Bowyer.


Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Wise, Sir Fredric

Mr. TAYLOR: I beg to move, in line 10, after the word "dwellings," to insert the words
which have been or are normally used for human habitation.
We have never yet heard from the Minister any statement in precise terms as to exactly what the Government have in mind when they propose to take powers to use the funds to be provided by this Resolution for the conversion of buildings other than houses, and, therefore, I think we are entitled to, have from them a definite statement as to whether or not it will be possible, for instance, to convert buildings which are in use, say, as barns at the present time, and whether it will be possible to use money under the terms of this Resolution for housing agricultural workers and others of similar economic condition in converted barns. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary will tell us precisely what is intended, because the object of the Amendment is to prevent the use of public money on buildings which have not been used as dwelling houses, but which are now possibly to be converted into dwelling houses under the terms of this Resolution. This Bill may be truly described as a Bill to provide doles for distressed dukes and impecunious squires, and to perpetuate in the villages the shockingly low standards of housing under which agricultural workers now live. Whatever justification there may be for reconditioning some of the property in our villages which has fallen into a state of disrepair, it seems to me that there can be no possible reason for adding on to the burdens already imposed burdens for the purpose of enabling farmers or landowners to convert buildings which have not formerly been used as dwelling houses.
I would like to know, from the Parliamentary Secretary, for instance, whether or not it is intended to enable people to convert buildings into dwelling-houses and then to insist, after they have
received public funds, that the tenancies shall be subject to the same kind of limitations that exist with regard to tied cottages generally. The hon. Member will be well aware of the petty tyrannies that are still practised in our villages, and I should be very sorry indeed to give any vote or assent to any principle which would perpetuate a system which interferes with a man's personal liberty, and if it is proposed to allow more houses with those conditions of tenure to come into being on the countryside, I sincerely hope this Bill will not go through. The right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Health, when this Bill was before the House on a previous occasion, referred to the use of the public money which the Bill proposed to provide for the purpose of preserving, reconditioning, and possibly altering some of the older and more picturesque buildings, which, he said, helped to preserve the genius of our villages. We want, to know exactly what is meant by the word "buildings" in connection with this Resolution. We are not prepared to agree to the use of public money for the conversion of buildings into dwelling-houses, because the spokesmen of the Government seem to have taken up an attitude, both on the occasion of the Second Reading and in this Debate, of deliberately refusing to define exactly what they mean by the term "other than dwelling-houses."

Sir K. WOOD: Hon. Members opposite began by moving an Amendment with the object of limiting the operations of this Bill, and it is, of course, in line with the opposition to the Measure as a whole which has been put forward by the Labour party, so that I take it that it is in that spirit that we must view all the Amendments put forward from those benches. I must first explain, particularly as the late Minister of Health is present, exactly what we generally propose as far as reconditioning is concerned, and then deal more particularly with the
specific points raised. The object of this particular Resolution and of the Bill is to make certain improvements and additions to dwellings up and down the country, which are capable, after completion, of becoming fit for habitation as dwellings by all sorts and conditions of people, and it is proposed, by the addition of an extra room, the raising of the roof, the enlargement of windows, the provision of a wash-house, the insertion of a damp course, or, which is perhaps more important still, the provision of an adequate water supply or sanitary convenience, to make what are now unsatisfactory dwellings into decent and proper habitations, particularly for the agricultural labourers of the country. That is the main intention of the Bill.
It is also contemplated, though not by any means to such a large extent, that there may be other buildings up and down the country, which, after the completion of the works I have indicated, may become in all respects fit for habitation as dwellings for the agricultural labourers and others who may desire to inhabit them. It will be entirely for the local authority itself to determine. The procedure under this Measure will be that anyone who has any such proposal to put forward will submit their proposition, and no doubt their plans, to the local authority, and the authority will then decide whether or not it is a fit and proper case to go forward. In addition to that, and as an extra precaution, both on the financial side and on the other side of this matter, the local authority, before it can proceed by way of the procedure under grant, has to submit its proposals to the Ministry of Health. Therefore, so far as any doubt, if there be any genuine doubt, that any buildings will be adapted which are not fit for the purpose and will not become fit and habitable for the people who so badly need housing accommodation at the present time is concerned, my answer is that it will be for the local authority, in the first instance, to determine, and after the local authority have come to the conclusion that a satisfactory dwelling fit for proper habitation can so be made, there is the extra check of the Scheme being required to be submitted to the Ministry of Health. That is really the answer to the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Taylor), who moved the Amendment.
I may say, in conclusion, that I should have thought that anyone who had any regard to the conditions of the countryside in relation to housing at the present time would have welcomed a proposal by which any sort of building, so long as it was made fit for proper habitation, would be made available as under the proposals of this Bill, The right hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley) and, I think, another hon. Member opposite said we should rest on the 1924 Act. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman himself knows what the result of his Act has been, so far as agricultural parishes are concerned. He spoke this afternoon as an authority on what should be done for the working classes, but he had an opportunity in his 1924 Act, and I may tell him that at the present moment there are only erected, under the provisions of that Measure, which—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): I must remind the hon. Member that he would not be in order on this occasion in making a Second Reading speech.

Sir K. WOOD: I will content myself by saying that only 2,694 houses have been erected under that Act.

Mr. WHEATLEY: Does the hon. Gentleman mean the Committee to understand that that is the total number of houses erected under that Act, and will he tell us of any other Act that has provided anything like the same number of houses for agricultural workers?

Sir K. WOOD: Yes. The figure I gave is quite correct. Only 2,694 houses have been built under the 1924 Act in agricultural parishes, and if the right hon. Gentleman will put a question to me, I will let him know the exact figures so far as houses under any other Act are concerned. My point is that obviously, after a very fair trial of that Act and a very large expenditure of money, we should do nothing to curtail the operations of this Bill, which is now being sought to be done by the Amendment before the Committee.

Mr. PALING: One would think from the speech of the Parliamentary Secretary that this was a Housing Bill. Can the hon. Gentleman give us an estimate of how many people who are not in houses
now are going to be put in houses as a result of the passing of this Financial Resolution? He knows himself that the major part of the money will be spent on houses that are already occupied and that the number of houses not occupied that will be put into repair and reconditioned will be very small indeed. I would like to know, because the hon. Member has not answered the question put to him.

Sir K. WOOD: Why should we stop a single house being repaired?

Mr. PALING: Why should you offer this as an alternative to the Housing Act, which was intended to build houses? That was the whole trend of the hon. Gentleman's argument, and he has not answered the question that was asked him. Will he give us an estimate of how many houses they think can be built out of the stables, for instance, suggested by the late Minister of Health, a suggestion which the Tory party opposite seemed to resent? How many houses are going to be adapted from buildings of this description? One hon. Member opposite was very indignant at the suggestion that stables were going to be turned into houses, so evidently he did not agree with it, but another hon. Member below the Gangway said that the structures of a good many stables were good enough out of which to build houses. That is the intention of the Government that houses shall be built out of stables, and the stables of the dukes and the impecunious squires, which my hon. Friend talked about, are to be turned into houses for the working classes. With all the faults that have been suggested in regard to the Housing Act of 1924, it did make an attempt to build houses for the rural population, who had never been able to get houses of any description at all. The number of houses that will be reconditioned, or the number of people who will get houses as a result of this Bill is so small, that no questions from this side can drag an answer from the Minister of Health or the Parliamentary Secretary. As a matter of fact, the bulk of the money is going into the pockets of people who already have houses, who have refused their obligation in the past to put them in proper repair, and because of that, a Tory Government is going to do it for them, and make a present of the
money to them. I was rather interested to read the speech of the Minister of Health about this subject from the æsthetic point of view. He said:
There is another aspect of the case which I should not like to omit, although it is not perhaps quite of the some order of importance. Our country villages contain a great deal that is characteristic of old England in style and material and in the architecture of their cottages. To look at cottages, such as you may see in the Cotswold district in Gloucestershire, or in East Kent, where I was the other day, is a constant pleasure, not only to country dwellers, but to town dwellers, too, and I must say that it seems to me it would be something like an act of vandalism if we were to destroy these reminders of an older and more picturesque world in order to replace them with buildings which, though they may be sensible, are of a different style and cannot be said to harmonise with their surroundings. It is not only an æsthetic questions. I cannot help feeling that the existence of an environment of this kind must do a great deal to preserve what I may call the genius of the place in the minds of the inhabitants."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 3rd August, 1926; col. 2853, Vol. 198.]
So that, presumably, in order to preserve the æsthetic value and the genius of the place in the minds of the inhabitants, old stables and barns which can be converted into houses, are going to be converted under this particular Resolution. I do not think much will be done in that direction from the point of view of this Resolution, and while the paragraph I have read speaks highly for the imagination of the Minister, I do not think it will work out well in practice. As a matter of fact, the money of this country would be better spent on new houses, while allowing some of these old houses to go out of repair and out of existence as soon as possible, rather than recondition them and repair some which are almost too bad for anything.
To argue that this is an alternative to the Housing Act of my right hon. Friend the late Minister of Health is sheer absurdity. What is going to be done by the people who are in control of these rural councils? An hon. Member on the Liberal Benches objected to an Amendment for the limitation of the money. He seemed to be of opinion that because of the natural conservatism and the undesirability of spending rates in any circumstances whatever, the rural council would put the limitation on it, and do nothing of the kind. And so, from all points of view, there does not
seem that good can come out of the Bill. In so far as this money has to be spent—for I dare say the majority of the Government will carry this Resolution—it should be spent on houses already inhabited or to be inhabited, and not used for converting these old barns and stables into houses which are thought good enough for the agricultural population.

Sir PHILIP PILDITCH: I am very glad that the Parliamentary Secretary is not prepared to agree to this Amendment, and for the reasons for which he expressed disapproval of it. He thinks —and I agree with him—that it means a restriction of the Bill, which, I think, is restricted enough already. I would like to see it carried further into other districts than, apparently, will be touched; but that is another matter into which I must not enter at this moment. I would like to say, however, that I am not quite sure, if hon. Members could see some of the things I have seen in my experience, whether they would not agree with me. If they at all agreed that it is desirable that the inhabitants of rural districts should have better housing facilities than they have at this moment, I think they would not support this Amendment. There has been a great deal of contempt this afternoon thrown upon the conversion of stables into houses. I am going actually to do what may be interpreted as the unpopular thing, and that is to suggest that there are plenty of places where, in the present condition of housing, stables can be properly, usefully and desirably turned into houses.

Mr. PALING: Would the hon. Gentleman tell us the cost of conversion?

Sir P. PILDITCH: I can take the hon. Member to a road in which stables have gone through various metamorphoses. They were designed originally as stables with horses on the ground floor, and the people who looked after the horses on the upper floor. They remained in that use for ten years. Then they became garages, and now they have become workmen's dwellings, and not only workmen's dwellings, but dwellings of people who can afford to pay more than the average working man, although I quite agree that a working man is as entitled to everything in the shape of sanitary conditions as
any other person. The passage of this Amendment would absolutely prevent a great many buildings of this kind being made into dwellings. The hon. Member asked me what the cost of transforming them would be. In these particular instances, the structure being quite sound, it did not cost a large proportion of the original cost of the buildings to transform them, but it cost a good deal, because the fittings used when the places were stables had to be taken out and replaced by fittings necessary to make them into proper houses. It was a sum, however, which I think would come well within what is prescribed in the Bill.
The Mover of the Amendment proposes to insert the words "which have been or are normally used for human habitation." If he had gone as far as to say, "which are, or can be, made suitable for human habitation" as a matter of principle, I should agree with him. But that is already covered by the Bill, as the Parliamentary Secretary has said. Who can imagine, having regard to all the stages through which the consents will have to be obtained, that any undesirable building is likely to be made use of for human habitation? It has, first of all, to receive the sanction of the local authority, and then it has to come to the Ministry of Health. Really and truly, if my hon. Friends opposite, who profess to speak with a direct sense of responsibility for the working classes of this country, have no better suggestion to offer than one which would limit, to my knowledge in a great many cases, the provision of absolutely suitable dwellings for the working classes, then I think they must have mistaken their vocation in regard to this question. Rather than limit the operation of this Bill, I would wish it extended. At present it is limited to rural districts, I take it, and to the districts which are governed by county councils and county boroughs. I do not know how many county boroughs will benefit by the operation of the Bill; I should hope that some would, at any rate. As I say, I would like to see the operation of the Bill not limited, and, like all Amendments which seek to restrict the operations of the Bill, I oppose this one.

Mr. MARCH: The hon. Member who has just sat down has dilated upon the alteration of stables into dwellings. I
would like to ask him to point to a rural area where these lovely stables have been altered into dwellings. I rather think he is referring to urban areas when he talks about the alteration of stables. I happen to be one of the unfortunates born over a stable. I have been closely connected with stables ever since, and I have been trying to get as far away from them as I possibly can, and to encourage everyone else to get as far away as possible. I happen to know something about the rural areas of Essex. I was in Essex during the last holiday, looking round. I did not see very many stables which could be made into good human habitations. I have seen a number of old dilapidated houses, the owners of which are waiting for the Government to pass this Bill so that the houses may be put into habitable order. The people have left them, the windows are out and the houses are going to have roofs put on. Then it will not make them decent, because they are not in a decent quarter.
What we want to do is to get on with the provision of decent houses for the people, and not try to improve some of the old buildings which have been referred to as picturesque. It is very picturesque to go down some of the swamps and holes where they put up

houses for agricultural workers! Many of them have not got any sanitary accommodation, and it is necessary that they should have water laid on and drains put in. But they cannot get it done by the present landlords, unless they are backed by the Tory Government with a subsidy. I think such houses ought to be demolished entirely, and new houses built. If hon. Members opposite had any decent respect for agricultural labourers, as they profess, they would build houses for them, or get them built, and then they would be the property of the local authorities, instead of subsidising private enterprise, which has failed miserably.

Mr. PALING: Can the hon. Gentleman give us an estimate as to how many houses will be converted as a result of this proposal?

Sir K. WOOD: No, Sir.

Mr. TAYLOR: Can the hon. Gentleman give us any estimate of the expense of the conversion?

Sir K. WOOD: No, Sir.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 81; Noes, 250.

Division No. 462.]
AYES.
[6.30 p.m.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Riley, Ben


Ammon, Charles George
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Ritson, J.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hardie, George D.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hayday, Arthur
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, Walter
Hirst, G. H.
Scrymgeour, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Scurr, John


Batey, Joseph
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sexton, James


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Bondfield, Margaret
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Bromfield, William
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromley, J.
Kennedy, T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Buchanan, G.
Lansbury, George
Stamford, T. W.


Charleton, H. C.
Lawrence, Susan
Taylor, R. A.


Cluse, W. S.
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Compton, Joseph
Lee, F.
Thurtle, Ernest


Cove, W. G.
Lowth, T.
Townend, A. E.


Dalton, Hugh
Lunn, William
Viant, S. P.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Day, Colonel Harry
March, S.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Dennison, R.
Maxton, James
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Duncan, C.
Montague, Frederick
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Gardner, J. P.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Whiteley, W.


Gibbins, Joseph
Naylor T. E.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Gosling, Harry
Palin, John Henry
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Greenwood, A (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ponsonby, Arthur



Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Grundy, T. W.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Hayes.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)


Albery, Irving James
Atholl, Duchess of
Balniel, Lord


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Banks, Reginald Mitchell


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Perring, Sir William George


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Goff, Sir Park
Pielou, D. P.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Grace, John
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Bennett, A. J.
Graham, Frederick F. (Cumb'ld., N.)
Power, Sir John Cecil


Bethel, A.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Betterton, Henry B.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Preston, William


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Price, Major C. W. M.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Radford, E. A.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Raine, W.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Ramsden, E.


Braithwaite, A. N.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Brass, Captain W.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Remnant, Sir James


Briggs, J. Harold
Harney, E. A.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Briscoe, Richard George
Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Harrison, G. J. C.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hartington, Marquess of
Ropner, Major L.


Brown, Brig. Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Haslam, Henry C.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rye, F. G.


Burman, J. B.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Sandon, Lord


Campbell, E. T.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir. J. A.(Birm., W.)
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Savery, S. S.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Holland, Sir Arthur
Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'1, Exchange)


Chapman, Sir S.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl.(Renfrew, W.)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Christie, J. A.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Skeiton, A. N.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Clarry, Reginald George
Hume, Sir G. H.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hurd, Percy A.
Smithers, Waldron


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark(Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Cooper, A. Duff
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Cope, Major William
Jacob, A. E.
Storry-Deans, R.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Jephcott, A. R.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Waddington, R.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Loder, J. de V.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Laugher, L.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Lowe, Sir Francis William
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Warrender, Sir Victor


Dixey, A. C.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Drewe, C.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Duckworth, John
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Watts, Dr. T.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Macintyre, Ian
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
McLean, Major A.
Wiggins, William Martin


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Ellis, R. G.
McNeal, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Elveden, Viscount
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


England, Colonel A.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wilson, Sir Charles H.(Leeds, Central)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Malone, Major P. B.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Everard, W. Lindsay
Margesson, Captain D.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Withers, John James


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Wolmer, Viscount


Fenby, T. D.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Fielden, E. B.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Finburgh, S.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Ford, Sir P. J.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Foxcroft, Captain C. T
Neville, R. J.
Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)


Fraser, Captain Ian
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)



Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrst'ld.)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Major Hennessy and Captain


Ganzoni, Sir John
Owen, Major G.
Lord Stanley.


Gates, Percy
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)

Mr. RILEY: I beg to move, in line 12, to leave out the word "thirty-one", and to insert instead thereof the word "twenty-seven."
The effect of this Amendment would be to lay it down that applications for assistance must have been received by a local authority before the 1st October, 1927, instead of 1931 as provided by the Resolution. I move this Amendment for two reasons. The first is in order to bring these proposals into line with the Government's financial policy on housing under the Housing Acts. I understand that the Minister of Health has already let it be known that the present basis of assistance to local authorities in their housing schemes is to terminate by October of next year, when some revision will be made. At any rate, public authorities feel they cannot count on receiving assistance for new schemes which are not approved by October of next year, and I suggest that it would be useful and convenient that the same arrangements should be made under this Resolution. My second reason for moving this Amendment is that the policy under this Resolution is a new departure in housing methods. It is obviously in the nature of an experiment, and by October of next year we should be in a position to know how far these proposals are effective, and to what extent advantage has been taken of the assistance offered, and we should know, therefore, how far Parliament was committed.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think the hon. Member has forgotten the conditions with regard to subsidies under existing Housing Acts which are to be reviewed as from the 1st October, 1927. That limitation applies to the completion of new houses by that date, and not to improvement schemes. It is a totally different thing from the proposal in this Bill, which is to limit the time within which applications for assistance can be made. The hon. Member would not achieve the purpose he has in view if his Amendment were carried, because we should not in the least know how far Parliament was committed. If we limit the time to the date he proposes, all that would then have happened would be that in order to make certain that no opportunity was missed, everybody would have sent in applications in respect of all their houses, without having had proper time to go into the cases and consider whether they did or did not need assistance. Local authorities would be swamped with applications for assistance, a large proportion of which would be found, on investigation at a later date, to be not worth proceeding with. From his own point of view it is better to allow a longer period in order that we may get only applications which are serious applications and have been submitted to proper investigation.

Question put, "That the word 'thirty-one' stand part of the Question."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 241; Noes, 82.

Division No. 63.]
AYES.
[6.45 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)


Albery, Irving James
Burman, J. B.
Davies, Dr. Vernon


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F W.
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley


Atholl, Duchess of
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Dixey, A. C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Drewe, C.


Balniel, Lord
Campbell, E. T.
Duckworth, John


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Chapman, Sir S.
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Ellis, R. G.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Christie, J. A.
Elveden, Viscount


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
England, Colonel A.


Bennett, A. J.
Clarry, Reginald George
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)


Bethel, A.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Betterton, Henry B.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Colfox, Major William Phillips
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Fenby, T. D.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cope, Major William
Fielden, E. B.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Finburgh, S.


Braithwaite, A. N.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Ford, Sir P. J.


Brass, Captain W.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Briggs, J. Harold
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Fraser, Captain Ian


Briscoe, Richard George
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Dalkeith, Earl of
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Ganzoni, Sir John


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Gates, Percy


Buckingham, Sir H.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Glimour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Goff, Sir Park
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Gower, Sir Robert
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Skelton, A. N.


Grace, John
MacIntyre, Ian
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Graham, Frederick F. (Cumb'ld., N.)
McLean Major A.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Grant, Sir J. A.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Smithers, Waldron


Greene, W. P. Crawford
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Grotrian, H. Brent
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E


Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Malone, Major P. B.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Margesson, Captain D.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Storry-Deans, R.


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Meyer, Sir Frank
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Harney, E. A.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Harrison, G. J. C.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Hartington, Marquess of
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Haslam, Henry C.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Neville, R. J.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hon. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Owen, Major G.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro., W.)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Perring, Sir William George
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Holland, Sir Arthur
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Pielou, D. P.
Waddington, R.


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Power, Sir John Cecil
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Hudson, R.S.(Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Preston, William
Warrender, Sir Victor


Hume, Sir G. H.
Price, Major C. W. M.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Hurd, Percy A.
Radford, E. A.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Hurst, Gerald B.
Raine, W.
Wiggins, William Martin


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl'n)
Ramsden, E.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Remnant, Sir James
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Jacob, A. E.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Jephcott, A. R.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Ropner, Major L.
Withers, John James


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Rye, F. G.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.



Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sandon, Lord
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Loder, J. de V.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Major Hennessy and Captain


Lougher, L.
Savery, S. S.
Viscount Curzon.


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)



NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Riley, Ben


Ammon, Charles George
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvi1)
Ritson, J.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hardie, George D.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, Walter
Hayday, Arthur
Scrymgeour, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Bondfield, Margaret
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromfield, William
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Bromley, J.
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Buchanan, G.
Kennedy, T.
Taylor, R. A.


Charleton, H. C.
Lansbury, George
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cluse, W. S.
Lawrence, Susan
Thurtle, Ernest


Compton, Joseph
Lawson, John James
Townend, A. E.


Cove, W. G.
Lee, F.
Viant, S. P.


Dalton, Hugh
Lowth, T.
Wellhead, Richard C.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lunn, William
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Colonel Harry
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Dennison, R.
March, S.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Duncan, C.
Maxton, James
Whiteley, W.


Dunnico, H.
Montague, Frederick
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Gardner, J. P.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Gibbins, Joseph
Naylor, T. E.
Windsor, Walter


Gosling, Harry
Palin, John Henry



Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
Hayes.


Grundy, T. W.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

Mr. PALING: I beg to move, in line 15, to leave out the word "two-thirds," and to insert instead thereof the word "one-third."
The principle of this Bill is thoroughly bad, and we on this side of the Committee do not believe in voting public money to private owners of houses. Consequently, we are trying to cut down the plundering contained in this Bill to the least possible amount. We want to prevent these people putting their hands in the public purse if we can. If we cannot do that, we want to reduce the amount that they are able to take from the public purse. It seems curious to me that, in order to get decent houses for the agricultural labourer, the State should have to resort to measures of this kind. There are ways and means under the present law by which owners can be made to keep their premises in a proper state of repair without resorting to proposals of this kind. Under these proposals there will be quite a number of private owners who will not let their premises to the people for whom the houses are intended, and who do not employ workmen at all.

These people will let the houses in the ordinary course and get the best rent they can. That being so, and in view of the fact that we failed to get rid of the principle of this Bill, we are now trying to cut down the principle of the Measure as much as we can.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The effect of this Amendment would be of a double nature. In the first place, it would make it incumbent upon the owner of the house to find two-thirds of the money instead of one-third; and, in the second place, it would enable the owner to get 3 per cent. on that, or twice as much as under the provisions of this Bill. Both of those are things that we on this side do not desire to encourage. The adoption of the Amendment would kill the operation of the Bill. That, I understand, is the object of the Amendment and therefore the Government are opposed to it.

Question put, "That the word 'two-thirds' stand part of the Question.'

The Committee divided: Ayes, 239; Noes, 85.

Division No. 464.]
AYES.
[6.57 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Clarry, Reginald George
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Albery, Irving James
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Ganzoni, Sir John


Atholl, Duchess of
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Gates, Percy


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon, George Abraham


Balniel, Lord
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Cope, Major William
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Goff, Sir Park


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Gower, Sir Robert


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Grace, John


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Graham, Frederick F. (Cumb'ld., N.)


Bellairs, Commander Canyon W.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Grant, Sir J. A.


Bennett, A. J.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bethel, A.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Betterton, Henry B.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Grotrian, H. Brent


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Braithwaite, A. N.
Dixey, A. C.
Harney, E. A.


Brass, Captain W.
Drewe, C.
Harris, Percy A.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Duckworth, John
Harrison, G. J. C.


Briggs, J. Harold
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hartington, Marquess of


Briscoe, Richard George
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Haslam, Henry C.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Ellis, R G.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Elveden, Viscount
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)


Buckingham, Sir H.
England, Colonel A.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Burman, J. B.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Holland, Sir Arthur


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Campbell, E. T.
Fenby, T. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fielden, E. B.
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Finburgh, S.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Chapman, Sir S.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Hume, Sir G. H.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Hurd, Percy A.


Christie, J. A.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Owen, Major G.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Jacob, A. E.
Perring, Sir William George
Storry-Deans, R.


Jephcott, A. R.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Pielou, D. P.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Power, Sir John Cecil
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Preston, William
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Price, Major C. W. M.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Radford, E. A.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Raine, W.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Ramsden, E.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Loder, J. de V.
Remnant, Sir James
Waddington, R.


Lougher, L.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vera
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Luce, Maj.-Gen, Sir Richard Harman
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Ropner, Major L.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Watts, Dr. T.


MacIntyre, Ian
Rye, F. G.
Wiggins, William Martin


McLean, Major A.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Macmillan, Captain H.
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Sandon, Lord
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Malone, Major P. B.
Savery, S. S.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Margesson, Captain D.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)
Withers, John James


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Meyer, Sir Frank
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Skelton, A. N.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Smithers, Waldron



Neville, R. J.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Major Hennessy and Mr. F. C.


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)
Thomson.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Ritson, J.


Ammon, Charles George
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hardie, George D.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Scrymgeour, E.


Baker, Walter
Hayday, Arthur
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Sexton, James


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Bondfield, Margaret
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromfield, William
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Bromley, J.
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Buchanan, G.
Kennedy, T.
Taylor, R. A.


Charleton, H. C.
Lansbury, George
Thomas, Rt. Hon, James H. (Derby)


Clowes, S.
Lawrence, Susan
Thurtle, Ernest


Cluse, W. S.
Lawson, John James
Townend, A. E.


Compton, Joseph
Lee, F.
Viant, S. P.


Cove, W. G.
Lowth, T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dalton, Hugh
Lunn, William
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Day, Colonel Harry
March, S.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Dennison, R.
Maxton, James
Whiteley, W.


Duncan, C.
Montague, Frederick
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Dunnico, H.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, North)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Gardner, J. P.
Naylor, T. E.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Gibbins, Joseph
Palin, John Henry
Windsor, Walter


Gosling, Harry
Paling, W.



Greenwood, A (Nelson and Colne)
Ponsonby, Arthur
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Groves, T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Hayes.


Grundy, T. W.
Riley, Ben

Main Question put.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 238; Noes, 82.

Division No. 465.]
AYES.
[7.7 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Balniel, Lord
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.


Albery, Irving James
Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Bennett, A. J.


Atholl, Duchess of
Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Bethel, A.


Betterton, Henry B.
Gower, Sir Robert
Perring, Sir William George


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Grace, John
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Graham, Frederick F. (Cumb'ld., N.)
Pielou D. P.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Preston, William


Braithwaite, A. N.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Price, Major C. W. M.


Brass, Captain W.
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Radford, E. A.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Raine, W.


Briggs, J. Harold
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Briscoe, Richard George
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Harney, E. A.
Remnant, Sir James


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Harris, Percy A.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Harrison, G. J. C.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hartington, Marquess of
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Haslam, Henry C.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Burman, J. B.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Ropner, Major L.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootie)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Rye, F. G.


Campbell, E. T.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N (Ladywood)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Holland, Sir Arthur
Savery, S. S.


Christie, J. A.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Scott, Sir Leslie (Liverp'l, Exchange)


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Clarry, Reginald George
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Skeiton, A. N.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Colfox, Major William Phillips
Hurd, Percy A.
Smithers, Waldron


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hurst, Gerald B.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Stanley, Hon, O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Jacob, A. E.
Storry-Deans, R.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jephcott, A. R.
Stott, Lieut.-colonel W. H.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Lister, Cunliffe., Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dixey, A. C.
Livingstone, A. M.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Drewe, C.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Duckworth John
Loner J. de V.
Waddington, R.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lougher, L.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Ward, Lt.-Cot. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Luce, Maj. Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Ellis, R. G.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Warrender, Sir Victor


Elveden, Viscount
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


England, Colonel A.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Watts, Dr. T.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
MacIntyre, Ian
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Everard, W. Lindsay
McLean, Major A.
Wiggins, William Martin


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Fenby, T. D.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Fermoy, Lord
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Fielden, E. B.
Malone, Major P. B.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Finburgh, S.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Ford, Sir P. J.
Margesson, Captain D.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R
Withers, John James


Fraser, Captain Ian
Meyer, Sir Frank
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Gadie, Lieut.-Col. Anthony
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Ganzoni, Sir John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Gates, Percy
Neville, R. J.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Young, Rt. Hon. Hilton (Norwich)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)



Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Goff, Sir Park
Owen, Major G.
Major Cope and Captain Lord



Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Stanley.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Baker, Walter
Bromley, J.


Ammon, Charles George
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Buchanan, G.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Charleton, H. C.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Bromfield, William
Clowes, S.




Cluse, W. S.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Scurr, John


Compton, Joseph
Kelly, W. T.
Sexton, James


Cove, W. G.
Kennedy, T.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Dalton, Hugh
Lansbury, George
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lawrence, Susan
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Dennison, R.
Lee, F.
Stamford, T. W.


Duncan, C.
Lowth, T.
Taylor, R. A.


Dunnico, H.
Lunn, William
Thurtle, Ernest


Gardner, J. P.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Townend, A. E.


Gibbins, Joseph
March, S.
Viant, S. P.


Gosling, Harry
Maxton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Montague, Frederick
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Groves, T.
Naylor, T. E.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Grundy, T. W
Palin, John Henry
Whiteley, W.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Windsor, Walter


Hayday, Arthur
Riley, Ben



Hirst, G. H.
Ritson, J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Hayes.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Scrymgeour, E.



Question put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported To-morrow.

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.

REPORT [16TH NOVEMBER].

Resolution reported.

CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1926–27.

UNCLASSIFIED SERVICES.

That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £3,250,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for Relief arising out of Unemployment.

Resolution read a Second time.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON: Before we part from this Resolution, may I ask the Minister of Health if he will elucidate some remarks that he made at the end of his speech last evening with regard to the assistance given to necessitous areas? He said:
I believe that by the system of block grants—when it is possible to allocate those block grants on a fair and proper basis, taking account not merely of population but also of capacity to pay as measured by rateable value—it may be possible to get a scheme which will bring relief to these necessitous areas without effecting injustice on any other part of the country. That is the permanent policy to which I look for-
ward as a solution of this problem." —[OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th November, 1926; col. 1822, Vol. 199.]
I should like to ask him how soon he can put that permanent policy into operation. This is a matter of very considerable urgency. The Minister himself, as he remarked last night, was one of a deputation to the Minister of Health in the Coalition Government urging that assistance should be given to necessitous areas. The urgency of the question is infinitely greater to-day. In my own district the Poor Rate, which was 1s. 2d. in the £ in 1913–14, is now 7s. in the £. These rates are crippling industry, and, unless something is done to relieve the situation, there will be no hope of industry being able to revive. I hope that the Minister can say something to-night which will bring some hope to these distressed areas, which have borne the heat and burden of the day for so long.

Orders of the Day — WAYS AND MEANS [16TH NOVEMBER].

Resolution reported,
That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, the sum of £3,545,000 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom,

Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolution by the Chairman of Ways and Means, Mr. Churchill and Mr. Ronald McNeill.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) (No. 2) BILL,

"to apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the year ending on the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-seven, and to appropriate the further supplies granted in this Session of Parliament," presented accordingly, and read the First time; to be read a Second time to-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 192.]

Orders of the Day — WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY (BLIND PERSONS FACILITIES) BILL.

Considered in Committee, and reported, without Amendment; read the Third time, and passed.

The remaining Government Orders were read, and postponed.

Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of 27th September, proposed the question, "That this House do now adjourn."

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-four Minutes after Seven o'Clock.